Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

When I compile LaTeX files, I use tectonic¹ which automatically download dependencies, compiles in one pass, and hides temporary files. But the regulars users of LaTeX I know all use a web interface — IIRC, it's an instance of Overleaf² installed by their university, with real-time rendering.

So when I read your list, I had these tools in mind, and the only items that made sense to me were:

2. (minor compared to Overleaf) typst compiles faster.

3. Diagnostics are better.

4. (minor and arguable) Lists have 2 simpler syntaxes.

The other points were irrelevant (dependencies), wrong (macros) or really dubious (margins, Git, bibliography). I think Typst has many more interesting features over LaTeX.

¹: https://tectonic-typesetting.github.io/

²: https://docs.overleaf.com/on-premises/installation/using-the...



Yeah fair enough, people have different experiences.

I would like to address that you read my point for margins/footers/etc. being difficult in Latex is dubious. (Also not sure why you mention the bibliography thing as dubious as it was a real issue of Typst, but shrug.)

A few years ago I spent many hours trying to figure out why a fancy footer wasn't rendering in a Latex document. I wanted a Page x of y counter in the footer which requires a few extra packages. So I try adding it, using two different methods \fancyfoot and \cfoot that I found on StackOverflow & OverLeaf, yet neither worked. I thought I was doing the incantations incorrectly. Spent endless hours figuring out what was going on, until I broke down and created a minimal example by selectively removing stuff which helped uncover that it was rendering but off page. The culprit was an overly large \fancyfoot that I hacked in to give a long baseline because I wanted to use up a huge chunk of the page due to Latex generous margins.

Yes I got things wrong, but Latex really didn't make this stuff easy, and took many hours to troubleshoot -- though it did improve my Latex troubleshooting skills.

In contrast setting layout parameters such as margins and specifying a footer is effortless in Typst and doesn't have that footskip footgun (at least I didn't encounter it):

    #set page(
        width: 210mm,
        height: 297mm,
        margin: (top: 15.875mm, bottom: 25.4mm, left: 15.875mm, right: 15.875mm),
        footer: context [
          #set align(center)
          #set text(size: 10pt)
          Page #counter(page).display() of #counter(page).final().first()
        ]
      )
Anyway, that's my justification for that point.


> 2. (minor compared to Overleaf) typst compiles faster.

I would argue that this isn't minor. At least in my opinion, it makes a big difference.

Overleaf, already 3 pages into a document, with a couple of TikZ figures, was getting slow, as in multiple seconds wait for each save.

Typst, on the other hand (Tinymist in VS Code) is really realtime. Text updating within some tens of milliseconds, and figures included in far below a second. It really _feels_ instant, and to me that changes the experience a lot.


I have laptop with a good-ish CPU that is only a few years old, and on page 3 tinymist is already starting to struggle. There is a noticeable input delay between me pressing a key on the keyboard, and the key getting typed & the preview updating. I think it's more of a tinymist issue though, as it has no debouncing and apparently also runs the preview updates on the same thread as vscode's input handling.


Interesting. I have not experienced that, except when trying out the pre-release version of tinymist, and did some messy multiple view+cropping into a big pdf (testing out the new pdf-image stuff.) I chalked it up to it being new and beta.

Admittedly, I have still not created large documents in Typst.


tangent: what syntax lets you use superscripts in HN comments?

test^1



aha, thanks!




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: