>> There are a bunch of LaTeX packages that only work with a specific
>> TeX engine, and which need special input code for that. For
>> example, `fontspec` (with its excellent OpenType support) only
>> works with XeTeX and luatex. Or think of 'lyluatex', which
>> obviously needs luatex.
>
>
>> There are a bunch of LaTeX packages that only work with a specific
>> TeX engine, and which need special input code for that. For
>> example, `fontspec` (with its excellent OpenType support) only
>> works with XeTeX and luatex. Or think of 'lyluatex', which
>> obviously needs luatex.
>
>
Le 20/11/2022 à 16:23, Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
There are a bunch of LaTeX packages that only work with a specific TeX
engine, and which need special input code for that. For example,
`fontspec` (with its excellent OpenType support) only works with XeTeX
and luatex. Or think of 'lyluatex',
>> in LaTeX, there are *really* differences depending on the engine.
>
> Oh, really? Color me surprised. Are there tools other than build
> systems that read those environment variables? And users set them
> globally, in spite of the incompatibilities that exist between the
> TeX engines?
There
Le 20/11/2022 à 15:40, Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
I'm too tired to defend superior typographical output
again and again since it is obviously only me who sees a benefit in
it.
It's not that I don't see any benefit at all in superior
typographical output. However, the benefits are tiny in my
>> Luatex would be the final engine to support.
>
> [...] I see no reason to assume that there won't be yet another
> engine (LuaTeX is already the fourth, if I count correctly),
Jonas, please don't think absolute, think *relative*! If I say
'final', *of course* I mean the engines available
> On the other hand, most contributors (except those who want to
> fine-tune the typography, i.e. basically you, Werner) will want the
> doc build to be as fast as possible, so I'm not fond of using it by
> default.
OK. I will adapt my patch accordingly and remove luatex from the
`configure`
On Sun, 2022-11-20 at 05:09 +, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > In https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1714 I
> > > suggest that we prefer luatex for building the documentation.
> > > What do people think?
> >
> > What I'm missing here is the bigger picture: Are we going to
> >
So in general I have the feeling that this doesn't bring us much,
but just keeps adding more checks to our configure and more choices
/ configurations to test on a somewhat regular basis. I'm not
really in favor.
I disagree with that conclusion, but if you feel that we really,
really must
I would have sworn one of the TUG updates on the state of luatex stated
that pdfTeX had been frozen for several years
and that at some point it was decided that "from then on" it would be
implemented in terms of luatex instead.
I must admit I never fully understood how this was mechanically
10 matches
Mail list logo
