Re: Comfortable editor for beginners under Windows?
Nicola Talbot
> Hi,
>
> I've been aksed at my university to give an introductory course on LaTeX for people (PhD students actually) without any knowledge of programming whatsoever. I use a Mac myself and I used to be under Linux before that, but for the course, I will be teaching on Windows machines to make it easier for the participants.
>
> When occasionally I have to use LaTeX in a Windows environment, my preferred installation is a variant of what is proposed here: http://www.math.aau.dk/~dethlef/Tips/install.html
> (The reason being that I want to stick with emacs, because my fingers know their way around without my having to think about it.)
>
> So as I am beginning to plan the course, I'd like to have other Windows user's opinion on what environment they prefer, why they prefer that environment, what they see as advantages and disadvantages for that kind of audience. I'm pretty sure I'll use Miktex (unless someone tells me there's a much better distribution for Windows nowadays), but I do not have any experience with editors, and no easy access to a Windows machine at the moment (I will borrow a laptop later from the sys admins as the date gets closer). But it takes a long time of usage before you can really judge how comfortable an editor is, so I was hoping to get an idea about pros and cons from people who work under Windows most of the time.
>
> I hope not to start a holy war about editors here :-) Yes, and I know this is sort of a FAQ, but it's not usally framed exactly like this, and "what is the best software for XYZ" changes so fast nowadays that search turns up too many obsolete answers... I hope not to be flamed in response. Thanks a lot in advance.
>
> Marie-Régine
When I taught LaTeX in a Windows environment I used Texniccenter.
Originally the computers didn't have TeX installed, so we had to access
TeX on the Unix computers via exceed and many of the participants who
had never used Unix had difficulties with the available editors (vi,
pico, xedit etc). The editor in Texniccenter is much easier to use if
you're used to point-and-click computing than something like emacs or
vi. I also looked into winedt, but because it's shareware, the
university opted for texniccenter.
I wrote an article on teaching LaTeX in the PracTeX journal
http://tug.org/pracjourn/2007-4/talbot/ that mentions some of the above.
Regards
Nicola Talbot
--
Home: http://theoval.cmp.uea.ac.uk/~nlct/
LaTeX Related Information: http://theoval.cmp.uea.ac.uk/~nlct/latex/
Creating a LaTeX Minimal Example:
http://theoval.cmp.uea.ac.uk/~nlct/latex/minexample/
Lars Madsen
could you then explain how to use the suggestions that texniccenter
makes when one types something like
\begin{doc
usually a popup appears but if one choses say \begin{document}, one ends
up with
\begin{doc\begin{document}
The Led editor (latexeditor.org) handles it a lot better than
TeXnicCenter, but the overall interface it a bit cluttered.
If this is totally novices, the very new TeXworks editor might be
interesting. (just download the two windows binaries and unpack them to
the same dir). It has no symbol buttons, only a compile button and basic
text editing (it is build upon TeXShop). Also it comes with its own
integrated PDF-viewer. As a test we have just given TeXwork to a number
of new users.
--
/daleif (remove RTFSIGNATURE from email address)
LaTeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
LaTeX book: http://www.imf.au.dk/system/latex/bog/ (in Danish)
Remember to post minimal examples, see URL below
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=minxampl
http://www.minimalbeispiel.de/mini-en.html
Karl Heinz Schloeglmann
> could you then explain how to use the suggestions that texniccenter
> makes when one types something like
>
> \begin{doc
>
> usually a popup appears but if one choses say \begin{document}, one ends
> up with
>
> \begin{doc\begin{document}
only type "doc" and Ctrl+Space
or "equ" for equation
or "fig" for figure
etc.
HTH,
Karl
--
_ _ _ _ ____
| |/ /arl|_| | | _| Civil Engineer & PhD-Student
| | | _ |einz \ Graz, Austria
|_|\_\ |_| |_| |____|chloeglmann http://www.schloeglmann.at
Rolf Niepraschk
> Hi,
>
> I've been aksed at my university to give an introductory course on LaTeX for people
Have a look at "Texmaker":
==> http://www.xm1math.net/texmaker/
I like it because it is acceptable simple and platform-independent.
...Rolf
Lars Madsen
> Hi,
>
>> could you then explain how to use the suggestions that texniccenter
>> makes when one types something like
>>
>> \begin{doc
>>
>> usually a popup appears but if one choses say \begin{document}, one
>> ends up with
>>
>> \begin{doc\begin{document}
>
> only type "doc" and Ctrl+Space
>
> or "equ" for equation
> or "fig" for figure
> etc.
>
> HTH,
> Karl
>
and how on earth should new users know this?
Denis Bitouzé
Marie-Régine SAPIR <marie...@advalvas.be> a écrit :
> I'd like to have other Windows user's opinion on what environment
> they prefer, why they prefer that environment, what they see as
> advantages and disadvantages for that kind of audience.
I'm not a Windows user but I used to give some courses on LaTeX
(for beginners and advanced users) and, often, student's OS is Windows
(though Linux is more and more popular). At the beginning, the editor I
installed was TeXniCenter but, since two years, I prefer Texmaker:
http://www.xm1math.net/texmaker/index_fr.html
or:
http://www.xm1math.net/texmaker/index.html
IMHO, its advantages for students are:
1. French GUI (if required)
2. more simple interface
3. easier compilation's concept (no profiles)
4. since few years, TeXnicCenter don't create LaTeX => PS => PDF
profile and it is hard to reconfigure. With Texmaker, no such trouble
5. panels with many math symbols available by click
6. PSTricks and metapost keywords available in panels
7. extensibility of implemented control sequences
8. UTF-8 editor
9. multi platform editor (Linux, Mac, Windows) so students who are
on Linux could use the same editor
Its disadvantages are:
1. less complete GUI tha TeXnicCenter
2. only errors are detected (with TeXnicCenter, also warnings and
overfull hbox are detected)
Best regards,
--
Denis
Sivaram Neelakantan
> Marie-Régine SAPIR wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I've been aksed at my university to give an introductory course on
>> LaTeX for people (PhD students actually) without any knowledge of
>> programming whatsoever. I use a Mac myself and I used to be under
[...]
>
> When I taught LaTeX in a Windows environment I used
> Texniccenter. Originally the computers didn't have TeX installed, so
> we had to access TeX on the Unix computers via exceed and many of the
> participants who had never used Unix had difficulties with the
> available editors (vi, pico, xedit etc). The editor in Texniccenter is
> much easier to use if you're used to point-and-click computing than
> something like emacs or vi. I also looked into winedt, but because
> it's shareware, the university opted for texniccenter.
>
> I wrote an article on teaching LaTeX in the PracTeX journal
> http://tug.org/pracjourn/2007-4/talbot/ that mentions some of the
> above.
I too would agree with Miktex and Texniccenter as one of the options
you should look at while teaching people. While I have not taught a
class, trying Emacs, Auctex and Tetex(the setup on my pc) was a bit
difficult for my office colleagues to follow.
But Texniccenter was simpler and they could recognise the IDE
components from some of their previous programming experience on C/C++
or whatever.
[...]
sivaram
--
Hongyi Zhao
The WinEdt should be your appropriate candidate, thouhg it is a
shareware, you can use it with full functions without any pay.
Regards,
--
Hongyi Zhao <hongy...@gmail.com>
Xinjiang Technical Institute of Physics and Chemistry
Chinese Academy of Sciences
GnuPG DSA: 0xD108493
-- Posted on news://freenews.netfront.net - Complaints to ne...@netfront.net --
Karl Heinz Schloeglmann
>>> makes when one types something like
>>>
>>> \begin{doc
>>>
>>> usually a popup appears but if one choses say \begin{document}, one
>>> ends up with
>>>
>>> \begin{doc\begin{document}
>>
>> only type "doc" and Ctrl+Space
>>
>> or "equ" for equation
>> or "fig" for figure
>> etc.
>>
>> HTH,
>> Karl
>>
>
> and how on earth should new users know this?
By searching and reading you are already one step ahead in the game ;-)
http://www.toolscenter.org/about/features
http://www.latex-community.org/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2545
SCNR,
Grant Rettke
It has buttons to call yap or generated pdfs, and generally attempts
to make people feel comfortable right off the bat.
Peter Flynn
> Hi,
>
> I've been asked at my university to give an introductory course on
> LaTeX for people (PhD students actually) without any knowledge of
> programming whatsoever. I use a Mac myself and I used to be under
> machines to make it easier for the participants.
I do the same, and I use ProTeXt (MikTeX+TeXnicCenter) and they all seem
perfectly happy with it.
> So as I am beginning to plan the course, I'd like to have other
> Windows user's opinion on what environment they prefer,
Go for the default option and use ProTeXt.
The only problem with installing TeXnicCenter is (still) that it *asks*
the user for the location of "the binaries", which baffles every Windows
user; instead of looking in the MiKTeX default installation location. I
think this is a synchronisation issue, but it's been like this for a
number of years, and is probably the only real showstopper for Windows
users.
///Peter
Peter Flynn
I tell them to ignore it. TeXnicCenter uses some obscure keystroke for
completion instead of TAB, which is frustrating but not serious.
///Peter
Peter Flynn
[...]
>> only type "doc" and Ctrl+Space
>>
>> or "equ" for equation
>> or "fig" for figure
>> etc.
>
It's an example of the rather many serious usability problems in TeX
editors, I'm afraid. Users overcome them with experience, but they
shouldn't have to, and new users certainly should never be confronted
with circumstances that defy rectification. Poor usability is one of the
reasons potential users look at TeX systems and give up, blaming TeX for
the deficiencies of the editors.
///Peter
Peter Flynn
>>>> could you then explain how to use the suggestions that texniccenter
>>>> makes when one types something like
>>>>
>>>> \begin{doc
>>>>
>>>> usually a popup appears but if one choses say \begin{document}, one
>>>> ends up with
>>>>
>>>> \begin{doc\begin{document}
>>>
>>> only type "doc" and Ctrl+Space
>>>
>>> or "equ" for equation
>>> or "fig" for figure
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>> Karl
>>>
>>
>> and how on earth should new users know this?
>
> By searching and reading you are already one step ahead in the game ;-)
If a user has to read the manual for fundamental user interface controls
then the interaction has been wrongly designed. Period.
RTFM is fine for advanced usage, rare occurrences, and complex
manipulation, but wrong, wrong, wrong for basic controls.
If an interface pops up something that cannot obviously be got rid of
(and defeated if need be) -- especially so frequently to a new user --
then it is failing to serve its purpose. Serving the underlying system
or software can be done by programming; serving the user can only be
done by designing the interface.
///Peter
Sebastian Szwarc
It is called LeD
http://www.latexeditor.org/
regards
Sebastian Szwarc
Lars Madsen
>>>> could you then explain how to use the suggestions that texniccenter
>>>> makes when one types something like
>>>>
>>>> \begin{doc
>>>>
>>>> usually a popup appears but if one choses say \begin{document}, one
>>>> ends up with
>>>>
>>>> \begin{doc\begin{document}
>>>
>>> only type "doc" and Ctrl+Space
>>>
>>> or "equ" for equation
>>> or "fig" for figure
>>> etc.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>> Karl
>>>
>>
>> and how on earth should new users know this?
>
> By searching and reading you are already one step ahead in the game ;-)
>
> http://www.toolscenter.org/about/features
> http://www.latex-community.org/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=2545
>
> SCNR,
> Karl
>
and how many new users do you know that actually does this? It is not
many :-(
Lars Madsen
quite right. TeXworks more and more seem to be a good choice for new users.
Lars Madsen
Led is better than TeXnicCenter, but the interface is very cluttered.
How should new user know that a blue arrow compiles with this latex and
another arrow is pdflatex etc. Also the default panels confuse new users
too much. It's fine that they are they, they should just not be
activated by default.
It should also be easier to which the Abobe Reader button with Sumatra
without having to mess with bat files or whatever is it.
So a bit more focus on making the editor a bit easier to understand for
new users, will make Led into a great editor.
Pavel Iosad
On Nov 25, 10:10 am, Lars Madsen <dal...@RTFSIGNATUREimf.au.dk> wrote:
> Led is better than TeXnicCenter, but the interface is very cluttered.
> How should new user know that a blue arrow compiles with this latex and
> another arrow is pdflatex etc. Also the default panels confuse new users
> too much. It's fine that they are they, they should just not be
> activated by default.
I agree. Some of our students who use Windows (most of them have Macs
and have no problem with TeXShop) ran into problems with TeXnicCenter,
and LEd turned out to suit them better, but the panels are still
overkill. Also unless I'm horribly wrong, there is no obvious way to
do a LaTeX > PS > PDF routine under LEd (something that comes with
handy buttons right off the bat in my preferred editor Kile), so I had
to use the user-defined .bat files for ps2pdf. This doesn't seem
friendly to a new user.
I really wish there was a version of Kile for Windows (without all the
cygwin and/or whole-KDE-under-Windows hassle), it would be a boon for
newbies.
Pavel
Denis Bitouzé
Pavel Iosad <edri...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> there is no obvious way to
> do a LaTeX > PS > PDF routine under LEd (something that comes with
> handy buttons right off the bat in my preferred editor Kile), so I had
> to use the user-defined .bat files for ps2pdf.
You should have a look at Texmaker: it provides "Quick compile" (with
corresponding menu, button and shortcut) that you can choose between:
* LaTeX+dvips+View PS
* LaTeX+View DVI
* PDFLaTeX+View PDF
* LaTeX+dvipdfm+View PDF
* LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF
and that you can even define...
--
Denis
Sebastian Szwarc
Sebastian
Pavel Iosad
On Nov 25, 11:18 am, Denis Bitouzé <dbitouze...@spam.wanadoo.fr>
wrote:
> You should have a look at Texmaker: it provides "Quick compile" (with
[...]
Thanks. I admit I haven't looked at it for quite a while. I use Kile
on both Linux and Mac (don't use Windows anymore), and when I looked
at Texmaker - pretty long ago I admit, it crashed on me first off and
I had other problems, so I haven't been keeping track. I'll pass it on
to the students :).
Pavel
Nikolaus Rath
> You should have a look at Texmaker: it provides "Quick compile" (with
> corresponding menu, button and shortcut) that you can choose between:
>
> * LaTeX+dvipdfm+View PDF
> * LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF
Is there any reason why one would want to choose the last two options?
It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
Curious,
-Nikolaus
--
»It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.
By definition, there are already enough people to do that.«
-J.H. Hardy
PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6 02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C
Joost Kremers
>> * PDFLaTeX+View PDF
>> * LaTeX+dvipdfm+View PDF
>> * LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF
>
> Is there any reason why one would want to choose the last two options?
> It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
> features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
i'm not sure which options you mean, but running pdflatex means you cannot
use any latex package that depends on postscript. pstricks and its
extension packages being the prime example (for me, anyway).
--
Joost Kremers joostk...@yahoo.com
Selbst in die Unterwelt dringt durch Spalten Licht
EN:SiS(9)
Robert Heller
>
> Denis Bitouzé <dbito...@spam.wanadoo.fr> writes:
> > You should have a look at Texmaker: it provides "Quick compile" (with
> > corresponding menu, button and shortcut) that you can choose between:
> >
> > * PDFLaTeX+View PDF
> > * LaTeX+dvipdfm+View PDF
> > * LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF
>
> Is there any reason why one would want to choose the last two options?
The last option (LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF) makes sense if:
A) you have EPS figures (PDFLaTeX does not support EPS).
B) have a postscript printer (all printers under Linux/UNIX are
postscript, since it is common to use a postscript print filter using
ghostscript). Having a PostScript file available saves the trouble of
converting from PDF to PS.
I don't know if dvipdfm handles EPS.
There have been other dvi-to-xxx translaters to other printer languages
in the past (are any still used?), so having a dvi file available is
sometimes useful.
There is dvidvi, which can be used to manipulate a dvi file in various
ways.
> It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
> features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
>
>
> Curious,
>
> -Nikolaus
>
--
Robert Heller -- Get the Deepwoods Software FireFox Toolbar!
Deepwoods Software -- Linux Installation and Administration
http://www.deepsoft.com/ -- Web Hosting, with CGI and Database
hel...@deepsoft.com -- Contract Programming: C/C++, Tcl/Tk
Denis Bitouzé
Sebastian Szwarc <beyo...@tlen.pl> a écrit :
> How to define XelaTeX engine in Texmaker to work painless?
Add your own compilation (chain) in "Quick compile" setup in Option ->
Configure Texmaker -> (button) Quick compilation -> User (option). Be
careful: I'm not sure the previous translation is correct (my interface
is in French).
On my machine, an example is provided for customized compilation chain
(on one single line):
latex -interaction=nonstopmode %.tex|bibtex %.aux|latex
-interaction=nonstopmode %.tex|latex -interaction=nonstopmode
%.tex|xdvi %.dvi
So I guess you could setup as:
xelatex %.tex|xpdf %.pdf
--
Denis
Da Zing
> why they prefer that environment, what they see as advantages and disadvantages for that kind of audience.
> I'm pretty sure I'll use Miktex (unless someone tells me there's a much better distribution for Windows nowadays), but I do not have any experience with
> editors, and no easy access to a Windows machine at the moment (I will borrow a laptop later from the sys admins as the date gets closer).
I use WinEdt + MikTeX.
WinEdt is well integrated with MikTeX (or is it vice-versa).
The current version has various auto-indentation features that I find
helpful when trying to keep my LaTeX source organized.
Here are some examples.
Typing \begin{environment} following by a second } automatically adds
the \end{environment} two lines below and repositions the cursor one
line below the \begin{environment}, and indented. For someone who
chronically forgets to end his environments I've found this a handy
feature. Furthermore, if you type \begin{environment}, type some
environment contents, and then wish to end the environment, you can
type \end{{ and it wall automatically replace it with \end
{environment}. For someone who frequently misspells environment
names, this is also a handy feature (unfortunately, it propagates
errors if you type the environment name incorrectly in the \begin
{environment}.) Both of these functions are a bit of a time saver
too. Another feature I find handy is the delimiter checking/matching
features. In particular, you can hit F12 in between delimiters and it
will select everything in between both delimiters, along with the
delimiters themselves. This is handy for times when you want to copy/
cut and paste a frequently used expression, or when two expressions
differ only by a few terms (copy the first, paste, and modify). I
tend to miss features like this when I am writing code (LaTeX or
otherwise) in other editors.
It took me about 4-5 years of using WinEdt before I figured out these
features, an experience which seems not unlike experiences with other
LaTeX oriented editors. It turns out that these functions aren't
built in to the editor, but are one of a set of customizable doodads.
These doodads just happen to come pre-loaded. I guess they are more
advanced examples of auto-correct. I think WinEdt calls them active
strings. If you can think of some other delimiter completing feature
that you would find handy, you could program it in yourself. I
haven't bothered to do this yet.
WinEdt does suffer from the disadvantage that it's shareware and not
freeware, but considering how powerful the editor is, I don't think
it's a bad investment to pay for the licence.
That's my 2 cents.
Randy
Lars Madsen
> Denis Bitouzé <dbito...@spam.wanadoo.fr> writes:
>> You should have a look at Texmaker: it provides "Quick compile" (with
>> corresponding menu, button and shortcut) that you can choose between:
>>
>> * PDFLaTeX+View PDF
>> * LaTeX+dvipdfm+View PDF
>> * LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF
>
> Is there any reason why one would want to choose the last two options?
> It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
> features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
>
>
> Curious,
>
> -Nikolaus
>
what they said ... ;-)
plus if you have any XY-pic diagrams that have arrows that are not
completely vertical or horisontal, then they look best using the dvips
backend.
Denis Bitouzé
Nikolaus Rath <Niko...@rath.org> a écrit :
> It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
> features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
Could you precise?
If I'm right, nothing is loose with the option LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf and I
don't use the other one (LaTeX+dvipdfm).
--
Denis
Ulrike Fischer
>> It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
>> features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
>
> Could you precise?
>
> If I'm right, nothing is loose with the option LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf
You loose font expansion:
Package microtype Info: Generating DVI output.
...
Package microtype Info: No font expansion.
And you can't use graphics like png, jpg etc directly.
--
Ulrike Fischer
Denis Bitouzé
Ulrike Fischer <ne...@nililand.de> a écrit :
> You loose font expansion:
>
> Package microtype Info: Generating DVI output.
> ...
> Package microtype Info: No font expansion.
OK.
> And you can't use graphics like png, jpg etc directly.
As you can't use eps graphics directly with pdflatex ;)
--
Denis
Don
> As you can't use eps graphics directly with pdflatex ;)
True. Unless it's produced with Metapost, which is valid eps, though
it's often suffixed mps.
Mariano Suárez-Alvarez
> >> You should have a look at Texmaker: it provides "Quick compile" (with
> >> corresponding menu, button and shortcut) that you can choose between:
>
> >> * PDFLaTeX+View PDF
> >> * LaTeX+dvipdfm+View PDF
> >> * LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf+View PDF
>
> > Is there any reason why one would want to choose the last two options?
> > It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
> > features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
>
> > Curious,
>
> > -Nikolaus
>
> what they said ... ;-)
>
> plus if you have any XY-pic diagrams that have arrows that are not
> completely vertical or horisontal, then they look best using the dvips
> backend.
Indeed :(
I wonder how hard it would be to "fix" xypic...
-- m
Sebastian Szwarc
> So I guess you could setup as:
>
> xelatex %.tex|xpdf %.pdf
Thanks I use Windows so perhaps instead of xpdf I should use acrobat
Sebastian
Denis Bitouzé
Sebastian Szwarc <beyo...@tlen.pl> a écrit :
>
> > So I guess you could setup as:
> >
> > xelatex %.tex|xpdf %.pdf
>
> Thanks I use Windows so perhaps instead of xpdf I should use acrobat
Yes, of course (sorry for the lack of precision). Maybe you could have
a look at lighter pdf viewers, as Sumatra PDF:
rabbits77
Netbeans is a fine IDE for development in many programming languages and
has had LaTeX support for a while now.
Use at least 6.5beta.
The benefit of Netbeans is that it is the exact same on every platform
since it is written in Java and is usable at once(modulo time spent
easily installing plugins) so students can concentrate on the task at
hand instead of wasting time learning their environment. If students
want to delve deeper into Netbeans they may...it is a rich platform in
its own right.
Lars Madsen
>>
>> plus if you have any XY-pic diagrams that have arrows that are not
>> completely vertical or horisontal, then they look best using the dvips
>> backend.
>
> Indeed :(
>
> I wonder how hard it would be to "fix" xypic...
>
> -- m
especially now that we have TiKz/PGF...
I don't think that there are any XY-pic development anymore. Perhaps
making a PGF clon of XY-PIC with the same syntax might be an idea...
Pavel Iosad
> especially now that we have TiKz/PGF...
>
> I don't think that there are any XY-pic development anymore. Perhaps
> making a PGF clon of XY-PIC with the same syntax might be an idea...
Indeed, given that TikZ already has the matrix type of structure (I
found it quite easy to go over to TikZ matrices after using xypic-
based xyling).
Pavel
Lars Madsen
could you provide an example? (I haven't used TiKz that much yet)
Peter Flynn
> I like netbeans.
Chacun à son goût.
> Netbeans is a fine IDE for development in many programming languages
> and has had LaTeX support for a while now. Use at least 6.5beta. The
> benefit of Netbeans is that it is the exact same on every platform
> since it is written in Java and is usable at once(modulo time spent
> easily installing plugins) so students can concentrate on the task at
> hand instead of wasting time learning their environment.
This is also why people use Emacs.
///Peter
Pavel Iosad
On Nov 27, 12:28 pm, Lars Madsen <dal...@RTFSIGNATUREimf.au.dk> wrote:
> Pavel Iosad wrote:
> >>> I wonder how hard it would be to "fix" xypic...
> >> [...]
> >> especially now that we have TiKz/PGF...
>
> >> I don't think that there are any XY-pic development anymore. Perhaps
> >> making a PGF clon of XY-PIC with the same syntax might be an idea...
>
> > Indeed, given that TikZ already has the matrix type of structure (I
> > found it quite easy to go over to TikZ matrices after using xypic-
> > based xyling).
> could you provide an example? (I haven't used TiKz that much yet)
The following code provides essentially similar results (but note that
TikZ's sloped lines look better in PDFLaTeX).
%%%%%%%%%%
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{xyling}
\begin{document}
\Tree{& \K{Foot}\B{d} & \\
& \K{Head}\B{dl}\B{dr} & \\
\K{$\times$} \B{d} & & \K{$\times$} \B{d} \\
\K{$\sigma$} & & \K{$\sigma$}}
\begin{tikzpicture}\matrix[row sep=3.5ex,column sep=.7em]{& \node
(foot) {Foot} ; & \\
& \node (head) {Head} ; & \\
\node (1) {$\times$} ; & & \node (2) {$\times$}; \\
\node (3) {$\sigma$} ; & & \node (4) {$\sigma$} ; \\} ;
\draw(foot) -- (head) ;
\draw (head.south) -- (1.north) ;
\draw (head.south) -- (2.north) ;
\draw (1) -- (3) ;
\draw (2) -- (4) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}
%%%%%%%%%
The \K{} command in xyling is used to align text in the cells
properly, something that the TikZ matrix does more or less
automatically, so reimplementation is easy. I am not a power user
myself, so I don't know how hard reimplementing the coordinates
command could be (i. e. telling TikZ to go "two cells down and four to
the right"), so I had to resort to some mild hand-coding there. A
quick look at the manual shows that TikZ matrices do keep track of the
cell's coordinates with the counters \pgfmatrixcurrentrow and
\pgfmatrixcurrentcolumn, plus there are hooks starting cells and empty
cells, so I'm guessing this should not be impossible.
Pavel
Andrew
> How to define XelaTeX engine in Texmaker to work painless?
>
> Sebastian
Options > Configure Texmaker > Commands. As there is no dedicated
XeLaTeX entry, the best we can do is replace one that's not often
used. For example I have replaced put "xelatex %.tex" in the PDFLaTeX
entry. Note that this will not change the label of the menu entry of
the button, but it causes the behaviour to invoke xelatex instead.
Kjell Magne Fauske
You can slightly shorter code if you load the matrix library and use
the 'matrix of nodes' option. In this case each node will also get an
automatically assigned name. See the example below for details.
%%%%
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{matrix}
\begin{document}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix[row sep=3.5ex,column sep=.7em,matrix of nodes] (mtrx){
& |(foot)| Foot\\
& |(head)| Head\\
|(1)| $\times$ & & |(2)| $\times$ \\
|(3)| $\sigma$ & & |(4)| $\sigma$\\
};
\draw(foot) -- (head) ;
\draw (head.south) -- (1.north) ;
\draw (head.south) -- (2.north) ;
\draw (1) -- (3) ;
\draw (2) -- (4) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\matrix[row sep=3.5ex,column sep=.7em,matrix of nodes] (mtrx) {
& Foot \\
& Head \\
$\times$ & & $\times$ \\
$\sigma$ & & $\sigma$\\
};
\draw (mtrx-1-2) -- (mtrx-2-2) ;
\draw (mtrx-2-2.south) -- (mtrx-3-1.north) ;
\draw (mtrx-2-2.south) -- (mtrx-3-3.north) ;
\draw (mtrx-3-1) -- (mtrx-4-1) ;
\draw (mtrx-3-3) -- (mtrx-4-3) ;
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{document}
%%%
- Kjell Magne Fauske
Herbert
only for the record ...
\documentclass[11pt]{article}
\usepackage{pst-tree}
\begin{document}
\pstree[nodesep=1mm,levelsep=1cm,treesep=2cm]{\Tr{Foot}}{%
\pstree[levelsep=7mm]{\Tr{Head}}{%
\pstree{\Tr{$\times$}}{\Tr{$\sigma$}}
\pstree{\Tr{$\times$}}{\Tr{$\sigma$}}
}
}
\end{document}
Herbert
Dr Engelbert Buxbaum
<marie...@advalvas.be>:
> I've been aksed at my university to give an introductory course on LaTeX
> for people (PhD students actually) without any knowledge of programming
> whatsoever. I use a Mac myself and I used to be under Linux before that,
> but for the course, I will be teaching on Windows machines to make it
> easier for the participants.
MikTeX (or ProTeX) are fine TeX-systems for Windozze. As to editor I have
used TeXniccenter, but then went back to WinEdt, which is much more
powerful. This editor integrates the entire production environment at the
push of a button. WinEdt is shareware (some may call it nagware, but for
one or two days in a course it's fine), your students can try it out and
buy it when they use it regularly.
Dan Luecking
wrote:
>Am Wed, 26 Nov 2008 10:32:54 +0100 schrieb Denis Bitouzé:
>
>>> It seems to me that the only effect is that one looses 3/4 of the PDF
>>> features that would be accessible with PDFLaTeX.
>>
>> Could you precise?
>>
>> If I'm right, nothing is loose with the option LaTeX+dvips+ps2pdf
>
>You loose font expansion:
>
>Package microtype Info: Generating DVI output.
>...
>Package microtype Info: No font expansion.
Funny, I don't get the above messages from microtype.
Moreover, with a lot of effort (preparing appropriate
expanded font files like cmr10+20 and an appropriate
map file) it actually works.
Of course, it is annoying to do this for every single
font one uses, but my point is that I don't get those
messages.
And I do get character protrusion under microtype without
having to do anything special.
Versions are
microtype: 2.3c
TeX: pdftex 3.1415926-1.40.9 (Web2C 7.5.7)
Dan
To reply by email, change LookInSig to luecking
Herbert Schulz
Dan Luecking <Look...@uark.edu> wrote:
Howdy,
The problem with your method is that every one of the fonts is
(partially) embedded in the final pdf since the system considers them to
be totally separate fonts. This can create huge pdf files.
I believe pdflatex no longer (it once did) embeds the individual
stretched/compressed fonts but rather the information about the
stretch/compression. I've noticed that there is little size difference
with the pdf file with expansio than without and it certainly looks
beautiful with expansion.
Of course, if you want to include jpg, pdf or png graphics directly in
your document pdflatex is the way to go.
Good Luck,
Herb Schulz
Dan Luecking
This was about latex+dvips+ps2pdf. My map file says that
cmr10+20 (for example) is just CMR10 extended horizontally
by a factor 1.02. Then dvips embeds it only once and ps2pdf
does the same.
But the point of my post was simply that font expansion
can be done via latex-dvips-ps2pdf and doesn't _require_
pdflatex. Moreover microtype doesn't say it does (in my
version, which matches the one on CTAN). Embedding fonts
was not the issue.
Of course, _I_ would use pdflatex unless other requirements
compelled me to go the PS route (in which case I probably
wouldn't bother with font expansion). I simply wanted to
set the record straight.
rabbits77
anymore. Emacs is dead, man. Dead!
Glyn Millington
> CluePhone is ringing...Nobody under the age of 40 uses emacs
> anymore. Emacs is dead, man. Dead!
Just in case anyone takes the above seriously ...... don't! Emacs is in
rude health and *many* of its users are younger than the editor, which
saw the light of day in 1976 :-)
For setting it up on Windows this might be a good place to start:
http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/emacs-en?CategoryWThirtyTwo
atb
Glyn
Robin Fairbairns
>rabbits77 <rabb...@my-deja.com> writes:
>> CluePhone is ringing...Nobody under the age of 40 uses emacs
>> anymore. Emacs is dead, man. Dead!
>
>Just in case anyone takes the above seriously
fwiw, there's a similar view about usenet. these bloomin' old geeks
that use it went out with the ark. didn't they?
>...... don't! Emacs is in
>rude health and *many* of its users are younger than the editor, which
>saw the light of day in 1976 :-)
nah. if ever there was a piece of software with obsolescence
specifically excluded from it, by design, it's emacs.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge
David Kastrup
"Nobody under the age of 40" is not the same as "nobody", young
whippersnapper. You'll find that the artificial hip joint industry is
quite prosperous in spite of its limited client range. One of the most
popular spamming subjects concerns medication of primary interest to
more mature audience. That would seem to vouch for the apparently
living state of those addressed in that manner.
And I actually doubt the accuracy of the underlying premise, too.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
UKTUG FAQ: <URL:http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html>