this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
258 points (98.1% liked)

Linux

48738 readers
1314 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
nooter692@lemmy.ml
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
258
Which communication protocol or open standard in software do you wish was more common or used more? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by cyclohexane@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml
356 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Whether you're really passionate about RPC, MQTT, Matrix or wayland, tell us more about the protocols or open standards you have strong opinions on!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

What about Typst?

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

The Typst compiler is open source. It is the open core of the web app and we will develop and maintain it in cooperation with the community

Try Typst now!

Create a free account to join the public beta.

Beta software marketing with "free accounts" and an open core compiler for a (probably) future paid web service tells me all I need to know.

Even though LaTeX has issues, not being an online service is not one of them.

[–] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

They host a proprietary service that does all the stuff, the compiler and spec are completely FOSS. So you need to create your own implementations, which is not hard.

I dont think they will close source the compiler. And thats basically everything thats needed?

I have 0 problems with people creating a fancy proprietary implementation to get people hooked. I will never use an online editor, but why care?

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Learning LaTeX and working around its quirks seems like a much better time investment than sidegrading to something that lives on premises given by a proprietary commercial project. If someone saw LaTeX and said "I want to make some version of this that is better", without alterior motives, they would probably just work on improving LaTeX (which a whole lot of people do).

Fancy does not mean better, and often is in many ways worse than plain old boring.

[–] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You know Overleaf is a thing right?

Many projects need to be rewritten from scratch I think. But I also think an easier markup language for LaTeX could be possible, keeping all the nice templates etc.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

From the LaTeX project:

The experience gained from the production and maintenance of LaTeX2e (the version you have been using for many years) had a major influence on our goals for future development and on new code which is now integrated into LaTeX.

A while ago we made the decision to drop the idea of a separate LaTeX3 format that would exist in parallel to LaTeX2e, but instead decided to gradually modernize LaTeX to keep it competitive in today’s world while maintaining compatibility methods for older documents.

I think this decision was pretty much a good one.

Overleaf does not modernize LaTeX in meaningful ways. It only adds cloud functionality and glossy appearance that you can get on dedicated editors anyways.

[–] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No, but Overleaf is just a proprietary fancy editor like the Typst one. Meanwhile typst is just as usable for building editor too.

I dont see any arguments against typst really. I am using Markdown all time and find it best, but lacking. Then LaTeX, honestly I dont want to learn as it must be a pain to write.

Now in typst, you can write academic papers etc just as well. All you need is free software, with good backing, modern tooling (rust, cargo), thus it runs everywhere. Its pretty cool!

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago

Overleaf are not benefactors that develop LaTeX for economic gains, unlike the situation with Typst that rely on it (to my knowledge). LaTeX is also cross platform, supported in tons of editors and can easily be converted to other formats with pandoc. It is also somewhat supported in other formats using implementations such as KaTeX for Markdown and Mathjax in HTML due to being the defacto standard for math typesetting.

Writing papers in LaTeX is a joy, not a pain. The end result is also a beautifully typeset document rivalled by none.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

or you could also just make an open source wrapper for latex and call it a day.

Nothing needs to be closed source to get people to use it.

[–] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

And it isnt :D the compiler produces PDFs which can be read with anything. The spec is open so you can write the code with any editor.

Just needs integration, will see if I can add the syntax highlighting to Kate

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 8 months ago

i suppose that's the case, but if you ever partially open source something, i think you're probably trying a little too hard.