@Diaa -- I'd like to pursue some details of your "self-plagiarism" problem in private. Will you permit @JosephWright to either send you my email address, or send yours to me, so that we can discuss the matter there? (In the meantime, I've found this article that somewhat addresses the subject: Ethics Lessons Learned While Editing the Monthly: Modern Publishing Is Raising New Issues.
@texdr.aft Oh, I've looked at the TeXBook off and on.
I would probably absorb it better if I had a paper copy, which I could take to doctor appts and other places where I have to wait. Or to read while eating (though that's a bad habit).
Impressive is definitely correct. And for being standardized in the 80s (one could make the argument that most of it was standard by the 70s) it's aged pretty well.
You have two possibilities.
1 – Use fouriernc with TeX Gyre Schola as text font
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{fouriernc}
\usepackage[no-math]{fontspec}
\usepackage{lipsum}
\setmainfont[Scale=0.93]{TeX Gyre Schola}
\begin{document}
\lipsum*[2]
\begin{equation*}
...
@texdr.aft A new standard would be nice. Stable is good and all, but it's been 25 years.
@texdr.aft -- That's definitely a good way to go about learning something new. What's also useful is to learn when you could use a little help, where you can find such help, and how to phrase your questions as clearly and precisely as possible. Helpers will appreciate that you realize their time is valuable, and will be more willing to help again with further problems. Sounds like you've made a good start.
@AlanMunn oh I was talking about the other bloke, not this bloke, but if we think about it, the other bloke did work with languages, but not in the sense of the language this bloke worked, I guess. So the bloke is not the bloke but could well be the bloke.
@texdr.aft -- There will never be a new "standard" for Knuthian TeX, but he has said many times that others are welcome to use his code to develop something new, just don't call it "TeX". It's been tried a few times, and TeX has been extended in useful ways, but so far the results still have disadvantages, and not all of the extended versions are mutually compatible.
@texdr.aft actually latex2 requires more than etex ((pdf)strcmp which comes from pdftex but is in luatex and xetex as well, and 2e will use \ifincsname from next year which is also not in pure etex.
@DavidCarlisle -- Er, um, I do. But only for checking hyphenation patterns. (At the AMS, I still used .dvi output, because there was a need to do so and a reliable mechanism for getting fully compatible .dvi' and .pdf` output.)
@barbarabeeton You are a DEK extension so covered by my previous statement:-) Anyway, you, DEK and AMS production, is still more or less "no one" as a fraction of all tex users.
@barbarabeeton oh I know, I cited pre 1900 papers in my thesis:-) but what I meant is that waiting for luatex to be stable in the sense of tex is probably a forlorn hope, essentially nothing is that stable (and tex being that stable isn't clearly a good thing)
@FaheemMitha -- When you're a technical support person in a production shop of a math publisher, you're expected to provide support so that something by a notable mathematician that was published 25 years ago in a house publication can be reprocessed for inclusion in that mathematician's "collected works". No errors, and if the page size hasn't changed, no different line or page breaks.
@FaheemMitha with luatex that is far harder than classic tex as luatex until very recently made incompatible changes at every release, and even now it will make changes that affect typesetting
@FaheemMitha -- luaTeX is conceptually more powerful than any of the other available "flavors". But lacking the kind of stability needed for a math publisher whose production is done inhouse, it's unsatisfactory. Granted, as @DavidCarlisle says, such shops are in the minority ...
@texdr.aft that isn't actually true. If you look at the systems that most professional typesetting houses use (Word, indesign, 3b2, ....) then none of them offer anything like the "frozen no changes ever" stability that tex-the-program promises. But it does not stop them being used.
@texdr.aft actually they will probably migrate from tex whether they like it or not, if only for legal reasons, accessibility legislation around pdf tagging is hard to meet at the best of times but as all such tagging is Unicode based, achieving it from an unextended tex is harder (much harder) than achieving it from a Unicode based system like luatex
@DavidCarlisle -- At the point when I retired from AMS, pdflatex was the predominant flavor in use (with output to both .dvi and .pdf, results identical), with occasional use of xelatex. As soon as the problem of how to reliably do automated graphics checking is cracked, full migration to xelatex was firmly in view.
@texdr.aft As I'm sure you are aware, LuaTeX can do a lot of things that regular TeX flavors can't. I find it particularly useful for talking to the world.
@barbarabeeton if you (they) are going to jump to a new system and aim for long term stability I would jump for luatex rather than xetex (even if that means you have to wait longer to jump)
@DavidCarlisle -- Yes, I know, and some of the e-tex extensions are needed at AMS. As long as they remain stable, ... (Peter Breitenlohner did a great job. Miss him.)
@texdr.aft no secret information, just an observation of popular trends. I'm not sure the tex world is big enough to really want two not very compatible unicode versions of tex. luatex has Unicode+Lua, xetex has Unicode+harfbuzz, but from texlive 2020 luatex will have Harfbuzz as well, which leaves xetex a bit exposed.
@FaheemMitha if ams and barabara are last users of 8bit tex, you can be last user of mercurial, but in the end yes it is the same, and not essentially a technical argument who wins.
@DavidCarlisle -- I'm making my packing list for TUG 2019, and trying to decide which of my old TUG t-shirts to take. I've found one for "The TeX Archive of the United Kingdom. Original and Best!" It's signed by Duane Bibby. I think I'll include that one.
It's not really the same situation. Though there are similarities.
@DavidCarlisle That sucks for XeTeX.
It's ironical that Mercurial now offers a substantially better user experience than Git. It was always better. Now it's much better. In large part thanks to the heroic efforts of Pierre-Yves David.
@FaheemMitha you can view it like omega (the first unicode tex extension, that isn't used at all now) as an important steppingstone into bringing tex to a Unicode world, it doesn't really matter if one particular system stops being used
@FaheemMitha but as I say it's not a technical issue. Microsoft didn't pay 19 billion dollars for github because mercurial has a better experience. git has won.
@DavidCarlisle I know. If i'm working with others i'd go for something that's good for that. But for my purposes now something extremely simple is all I need.
@FaheemMitha many people get by with simpler things eg a dropbox fileshare which at least gives you access to previous versions without all the merging and logging of a real version control system. It's still a lot better than having no backup at all which is probably the most common case
For monolithic projects by a single person, it just seems like overkill. Again, I haven't done anything with a team; if I were then I would indeed be using mercurial or git or whatever.
I try to be minimal and write things on paper and then enter them into a file later, and that just doesn't seem too compatible with something greater than "file (version 1)" etc.
@FaheemMitha where would you say the greatest value lies?
@texdr.aft It's helpful in a bunch of different ways. Used properly, you'll never wonder - "where did that file go?" again. For one thing, it's a really good tool for organizing.
At least, Mercurial is. I've never used Git, and know little about it.
@UlrikeFischer there was some correspondence some years ago whether if foo and foo.tex both existed, which should be found by \input foo, and some systems changed so all were in agreement but I can not recall where it was..
@FaheemMitha er so how can you know mercurial has a better interface?
@texdr.aft it's not maligned, it's just not used by many people because most of the people who previously used it have switched to git many large repositories switched and the big free sites that offered mercurial hosting all offer git as well
@texdr.aft I'm not aware that it is maligned. Most people who bother to take the trouble to learn it properly and use it, like it. But as David was pointing out, Git has a much bigger market share.
@FaheemMitha note that MS didn't pay that money (or any money) for git, it being free... they paid it for the website (and its user list) the fact that github is backed up by git is for many of its users of no consequence at all, it could be svn or mercurial or anything,
Just looking at "cheat sheets" for both systems, git seems to have a larger and more verbose command repertoire
"When comparing Git vs. Mercurial, one of the prominent differences is the level of expertise needed to use each system. Git is more complex, and it requires your team to know it inside and out before using it safely and effectively. With Git, one sloppy developer can cause major damage for the whole team. Its documentation is also harder to understand."
"Mercurial’s syntax is simpler, and the documentation is easier to understand. Furthermore, it works the way a tool should — you don’t think about it while using it. Conversely, with Git, you might end up spending time figuring out finicky behavior and pouring over forums for help."
Which is not to say it's complicated or difficult, it's just not something you'd need to concern yourself with straight away. Having said that, this is the Evolve user guide.
And neither of them really make any effort to describe workflows.
You'll probably want to create yours as you go along, anyway.
@texdr.aft I wouldn't. Unless it entertains you. You could write the world's first VCS in Common Lisp, actually.
The Mercurial UI is very smooth and uniform, which helps with new tools. I was initially quite intimidated when I first started using Evolve, but the UI helped.
One warning: VCS's do require care and feeding. So you need to spend time doing stuff to take care of your repos.
But it's usually time well spent, because it forces you to think about what you are doing with your project.
@UlrikeFischer I've been scratching my head too. I thought the braced syntax was there primarily to allow filenames with spaces in them. But now it appears that the semantics of the two syntaxes are different by design?
@HaraldHanche-Olsen I'm still not sure that I understand what he means. There is a texmf.cnf option (try_std_extension_first = t) but imho it is relevant only if both a.b.tex and a.b exist and I don't think that it affects files without any period. Also it has nothing to do with \openin behaving differently than \input.
You have two possibilities.
1 – Use fouriernc with TeX Gyre Schola as text font
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{fouriernc}
\usepackage[no-math]{fontspec}
\usepackage{lipsum}
\setmainfont[Scale=0.93]{TeX Gyre Schola}
\begin{document}
\lipsum*[2]
\begin{equation*}
...
