For my own work, I already find Typst superior to TeX and I use it in some of my PDF creation pipelines. One can debate the differences of math syntax, of cours

For my own work, I already find Typst superior to TeX and I use it in some of my PDF creation pipelines. One can debate the differences of math syntax, of course. For documents whose source is likely to be shared or handed over to other people, writing in TeX rather than expecting them to learn a new language is still good citizenship. The big differences for me are: (1) TeX has the feeling of separating the author and editor, I get to write my stuff and someone else (Elsevier etc.) handles the template and layout. This is a good thing when the two are actually different people, but when I'm asked to do both ("write this up in the style of that") there's a whole lot of Yak Shaving to get it right. For Typst it's much more intuitive to say here's the page layout, this is the font to use. (yes XeTeX exists, but that has other problems over here) (2) TeX ends up in dependency hell sooner or later where package X is incompatible with Y when you've also loaded Z. There's a lot in the comprehensive LaTeX symbol list where you just want to load some symbol to draw a triangle and you end up fighting the Type1/Type3 fonts thing and getting stmaryrd to play nice. I still don't have a clean solution for making some basic shapes (circle, triangles pointing in several directions, square, diamond) that come in outline and filled versions and take up space exactly from the baseline to the cap line (I could probably live with just the x-height instead).