 
| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Thu, 23 Jan 2003 23:49:20 +0000 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Organization: |
School of Mathematics, Trinity College Dublin |
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Thursday 23 January 2003 21:58, David Kastrup wrote:
> To put it bluntly: why would I need to persuade people like you? The
> question of the right tool for the right job needs to get decided by
> the people _doing_ the job.
As far as I am concerned the job is printing mathematics,
not writing packages which -- to return the bluntness -- nobody uses.
> "what has been good enough for Knuth is good enough for us."
Not good enough _for_ Knuth, good enough _by_ Knuth,
> LaTeX
> contains hundreds of bugs that are triggered not infrequently.
Not by me.
> LaTeX has outgrown TeX painfully already.
You keep saying things like this.
You may feel pain.
but as far as I'm concerned LaTeX works pretty painlessly.
In all the acres of argumentation you've propounded on the topic
you have never -- as far as I am aware --
produced a single LaTeX file which would be better --
more easily, more elegantly --
processed by elatex than latex.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
tel: +353-86-233 6090
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
|
|
|
