Context: LaTeX is a typesetting system. When compiling a document, a lot of really in-depth debugging information is printed, which can be borderline incomprehensible to anyone but LaTeX experts. It can also be a visual hindrance when looking for important information like errors.

    • Takios@discuss.tchncs.de
      122·
      4 months ago

      Which apparently needs an account just to use it and a subscription to use it well. Don’t think something like that can be a lord and saviour over LaTeX.

      • renzev@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
        91·
        4 months ago

        This is what I though as well when I first looked at their website. But nope, the compiler and LSP are available as fully offline programs under the apache license. But I understand how you’d get confused, their website is strikingly polished for an open-source non-commercial project!

        The only thing you’re missing out on if you use the offline version is having the rendered preview update in real time as you type, but you can sort of emulate that feature using their neovim plugin and a really fast PDF viewer like zathura.

        • Andrew
          2·
          4 months ago

          The last point: I use MuPDF + entr as zarhura crush as a mf, not usable at all. Some others use typst-preview which can be used in the browser and as a VS Code extension. But I use Neovim btw and the web version lack a few key features. Anyway, I use mupdf+entr+nvim for many months now and it’s more than enough for me.

          The web version, for me, is just to share my local project with someone, that’s it.

      • Andrew
        102·
        4 months ago

        Well, overleaf.com is for LaTeX, but typst.app is for Typst, a superior alternative witch is in beta. So for some people it won’t be enough (yet), but for me it’s awesome.

          • renzev@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
            10·
            4 months ago

            Whether or not typst is “superior” is largely debatable, but here are some reasons why I personally prefer Typst to LaTeX:

            • leaner syntax
            • less boilerplate
            • (arguably) more intuitive syntax for math and formatting
            • real-time preview thanks to incremental compilation
            • automatic package management
            • Ability to perform calculations/data processing inline inside your document (I know you can do this in LaTeX as well, but typst makes it easier)

            However, as Andrew said, it is very much still in beta, so I don’t think it can be a complete replacement for LaTeX. Basically, think of it as something in between LaTeX and Markdown. Less features, but easier to write.

          • Andrew
            32·
            4 months ago

            Since for me it has all the needed features, for me — it’s by far superior (even compared to LuaLaTeX which is the last thing I used). But some people, mainly from academia, are still can’t switch due to some features missing. A few people were able to create thesis in Typst (including myself). In the long run it will be 100% superior. In the mean time, there are a few hacks to enable some features that are otherwise not implemented yet.