Public

ugh, another idiocy of TeX legacy.

see http://mathquill.com/ it's cool and all, but note the syntax. Quote:

try \sqrt x, try \sin\theta .

when you want square root or sin etc, why cannot we simply write

r = Abs[z] = Sqrt[x^2+y^2]

and let that be the syntax? why the backslash syntax soup?

the damage of TeX, like unix, is deep and pervasive. It's free, like cig given to children, washed people's brain. It's so rooted that people are now saying the web should abolish MathML and let TeX be the standard.

The TeX Pestilence (the problems of TeX/LaTeX)

http://xahlee.info/cmaci/notation/TeX_pestilence.html

#math #latex

see http://mathquill.com/ it's cool and all, but note the syntax. Quote:

try \sqrt x, try \sin\theta .

when you want square root or sin etc, why cannot we simply write

r = Abs[z] = Sqrt[x^2+y^2]

and let that be the syntax? why the backslash syntax soup?

the damage of TeX, like unix, is deep and pervasive. It's free, like cig given to children, washed people's brain. It's so rooted that people are now saying the web should abolish MathML and let TeX be the standard.

The TeX Pestilence (the problems of TeX/LaTeX)

http://xahlee.info/cmaci/notation/TeX_pestilence.html

#math #latex

View 22 previous comments

- +Xah Lee, David's still about, still doing Emacs stuff. Spending lots of time on other things though, hence the falloff in auctex activity and the ages since a release :P

+Fabrice Popineau, TeX has a sort of syntax, I'd say: it's just highly mutable. i.e. you can change which characters are active and what macros expand to, but you can't change the fact that it**has**a concept of active characters and macro-expansion.Jan 14, 2014 - +Nick Alcock Well, we could discuss what is a syntax and what kind of syntax TeX has. But the fact is that whatever syntax it is , the usual lex/yacc will be of little help to capture it :-) As I see it (and as it is described in TeX for the Impatient for example), it is rather an engine that gobbles characters, process and digest them to spit out something.Jan 14, 2014
- Agreed. It's even less like a normal neatly-parsed language than Perl is. :)Jan 14, 2014
- TeX is what we call a linear context-free rewriting system: close to a Type-2 grammar but not included in it. Sort of a Type-1.98 grammar. :)

Perl is what we call a mess.Jan 14, 2014 - +Xah Lee, +Nick Alcock, David is one of the most active developers of GNU LilyPond now.

Hey, and there's still quite some activity in AUCTeX with lots of improvements since 11.87. It's just the release procedure that's so awful that nobody wants to do it often...Jan 14, 2014 - +Craig Lennox Formally speaking, I'm not so sure. I would rather put it in the "linear bounded automata" category. But close to CFGs? I don't feel it this way. It is a rewriting system but you can change the rewrite rules.Jan 14, 2014

Add a comment...