Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:56:24 +0000 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
In-Reply-To: |
<20110101204323.GA14218@khaled-laptop> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 01/01/2011 20:43, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> Just wondering, what benefit pdftex have over luatex (with the later
> being an extension of the former), or is it about people who are not
> willing/can't switch to new engine? Do we expect such people to be
> welling/able to switch to latex3 either?
At present there is not too much of an issue: we don't have any working
functionality for LaTeX3 where this question really shows up. This may
change once we have some font stuff. (As I said, I have some ideas in
this area, which include 'shameless rip-off fontspec'.)
There is quite a large body of stuff which doesn't really need LuaTeX:
stuff in western European languages using fonts already available to
TeX. I suspect that forcing this subset of work to drop pdfTeX, which is
quite capable of doing the job, might be consider a bit 'over the top'.
As I said earlier, we decided to require \pdfstrcmp after some
applications came up where the alternatives were a bad idea (difference
in expandability with different supported engines). So this might change
as we develop more code. I can only comment on what we have now, where
there is no strong case for dropping support for pdfTeX. (Indeed, almost
all of the day-to-day testing I do uses pdfTeX as it remains my default
engine. LuaTeX is a lot slower, I'm afraid, quite apart from questions
about bugs introduced by the ongoing changes.)
--
Joseph Wright
|
|
|