ed@imuse.uucp (Ed Braaten) (12/31/88)
What are the advantages of using TeX over nroff/troff? I've heard a lot about it, but since I don't have access to it, I've never been able to try it out. I chose nroff since it seems to be a standard tool available under most implementations of U**X. What are the major differences in the two systems? Which is more reliable, portable? I had some trouble getting nroff to print all the special characters I need (umlauts & Cyrillic) since the printer I have (Star NL-10) likes to see ASCII NUL's in some of its control sequences. It works now, but since I don't have source to nroff, I had to do everything through the term driving table nroff uses (/usr/lib/term/*). Fortunately, SCO provides source to a generic term driving table which you can use to roll your own. How flexible is TeX in this area? How portable would the solution be? I would welcome any input from those of you familiar with both systems... Best wishes in 1989! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ed Braaten | "Love the Lord your God with all your Intel Semiconductor GmbH | heart and with all your soul and with Dornacher Strasse 1 | all your strength." Deuteronomy 6:5 8016 Feldkirchen bei Muenchen | West Germany | uucp: ed@imuse.uucp Ph: +49 89 90992-426 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
pcm@iwarpj.intel.com (Phil C. Miller) (01/02/89)
In article <318@imuse.uucp> ed@imuse.uucp (Ed Braaten) writes: >What are the advantages of using TeX over nroff/troff? I've heard >a lot about it, but since I don't have access to it, I've never >been able to try it out. I chose nroff since it seems to be a >standard tool available under most implementations of U**X. >What are the major differences in the two systems? Which is >more reliable, portable? Learning a text processing language is very much like learning a programming language. The process is as subject to pre-existing personal bias, is as error-prone, can be as frustrating. And before I express my opinions, I will quite plainly point out that they are just that--opinions. Programming languages, editors, and text processing languages are all subject to personal biases, and I am only offering my own personal biases and am not pretending they are facts. First of all, to extend the programming language analogy, recall the general statements people make about programming in higher level languages: the average programmer can produce a fairly constant number of lines in one day. The higher level languages pack a lot more power per line. [In my opinion,] The LaTeX system is very much like a higher level language. The TeX system is more like an assembly language. *roff is like microcode. *roff can be a real pain when you're down to lining things up in the final draft, trying to make copy that "looks good". LaTeX is much easier to deal with because it has very intelligent native behavior and not as much tweaking needs to be done in the final draft. >I had some trouble getting nroff to print all the special >characters I need (umlauts & Cyrillic) since the printer I >have (Star NL-10) likes to see ASCII NUL's in some of its >control sequences. It works now, but since I don't have >source to nroff, I had to do everything through the term >driving table nroff uses (/usr/lib/term/*). Fortunately, >SCO provides source to a generic term driving table which >you can use to roll your own. How flexible is TeX in this >area? How portable would the solution be? The *TeX programs produce device independent output files with the extension .dvi. A custom program is required to print a .dvi file on a specific printer, but there is such a printer program for virtually any printer you are likely to encounter. The printer programs generally produce bit-mapped hard copy, making it easier to print unusual things: mathematical formulae, non-english character fonts, etc. *TeX usually cohabits with about a zillion font files. The *roff programs seem to rely on fonts already loaded in your laser printer, although I am really conjecturing here. I have had difficulty getting *roff to go beyond a small repertory of tricks. There are about a zillion style files rattling around the *TeX community, too. These style files correspond roughly to the macro files in *roff. For example, a university may have a style file for their style of thesis. I have seen style files for publishing articles in publications of the ACM and other periodicals. Finally, one of my favorite reasons for using *TeX is that nobody's trying to make big bucks off of it. The Gnu people distribute *TeX, nominally for the cost of distribution, and much of the software is supported by a large user community. I like that; people GIVE AWAY software which is actually useful and DON'T make you belly up for it. >I would welcome any input from those of you familiar with both >systems... > >Best wishes in 1989! >Ed Braaten >Intel Semiconductor GmbH Phil Miller iWarp Program Intel Development Operation Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer) (01/03/89)
In article <318@imuse.uucp>, ed@imuse.uucp (Ed Braaten) says: > >What are the advantages of using TeX over nroff/troff? I've heard TeX is to *roff as C is to FORTRAN. That is, TeX and the roff family are powerful in the hands of an expert, but TeX is more streamlined and elegant, and offers a few features (better math notation support).
UH2@PSUVM.BITNET (Lee Sailer) (01/04/89)
In article <4020@omepd.UUCP>, pcm@iwarpj.intel.com (Phil C. Miller) says: > > >[In my opinion,] The LaTeX system is very much like a higher level >language. The TeX system is more like an assembly language. *roff is I like the analogy to programming languages, but equating TeX (and by extension plain TeX) to assembly is going to far, I think. How about this: Plain TeX is a 3gl such as Fortran, C, or Pascal. LaTeX is the same 3gl in an organization where many prewritten software libraries have been written. I don't use LaTeX because its pre-written libraries are never quite what *I* need. I prefer Plain or Vanilla TeX because it is easier for me to figure out how to get my desired format starting from scratch than by trying to divine all the mysteries of LaTeX. lee