Re: Boldface typing

[Marcin Borkowski <mbork@wmi.amu.edu.pl>]

On 2014-12-31, at 13:20, Rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, December 31, 2014 1:56:16 PM UTC+5:30, Marcin Borkowski wrote:
>> On 2014-12-31, at 05:55, Rusi wrote:
>> 
>> > emacs does a rather poor job of word processing
>> >
>> > The solution in the emacs/unix world 20 years ago was latex/groff etc -- ie
>> > document processors
>> 
>> Today, the solution is LaTeX (without the groff part),
>
> I personally could get more out of groff than out of latex.
> Also it looked more beautiful and the ps files were much smaller
>
> [20+ years ago...]

(Approximately) 20 years ago, when LaTeX2e was the hot new thing, it
might have been the case.  Prior to LaTeX2e, customizing your LaTeX
output was a nightmare.  Nowadays, with thousands of classes and
packages, including memoir, koma-script, tikz, beamer and many others,
the situation is a lot different - especially with the very dynamic
community, releasing several packages/modules/plugins every month.  And
don't forget the ongoing work on LaTeX3 and LuaTeX (though this last is
more on the ConTeXt side of things; ConTeXt is also being constantly
worked on, and is capable of many things, including native XML input,
XML/ePUB output, very good support for tables, images and columns -
LaTeX is notoriuously lacking good support for columns and wrapping text
around images).  Is groff also developed at such a pace?  (I'm just
asking, I don't know.)

Best,

-- 
Marcin Borkowski
http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
Adam Mickiewicz University