[lltx] bidi package extended for LuaLaTeX
khaledhosny at eglug.org
Fri Apr 2 18:19:11 CEST 2010
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:47:35AM +0200, luigi scarso wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <mpg at elzevir.fr> wrote:
> > Khaled Hosny a écrit :
> >> Any one who wrote or maintained a reasonably complex tex macro code
> >> knows it is pain to write, pain to understand and pain to maintain, the
> >> main idea behind luatex is to give tex a sane programming language which
> >> we all know tex mcros isn't.
> > By the way, concerning the advantages/disavantages of LuaTeX, it's worth noting
> > that LuaTeX's overall complexity is bigger that other engines, since you need to
> > understand /both/ TeX and Lua languages in order to be a good LuaTeX programmer.
> > (Though maybe you don't need to be as good with TeX as previously, you just
> > can't ignore TeX rules for lexical analysis (catcodes etc) and development.)
> Typographical programming is an obscure subject,unlike other
> traditionals programming areas.
> LuaTex offers
> 1) a macro language for typesetting (TeX)
> 2) a procedural/object_oriented language for parsing, searching, extending (Lua)
> 3) a graphical language for draw (MetaPost)
> 1) & 2) can be used to write macro or typeset, but I prefear 1) for typesetting,
> a 1) layer plus 2) layer for macros;
> 3) is a sort of jolly.
Essentially the same here, I'm fine with using tex macros for
typesetting, I even find it a very powerful feature of tex, but using it
to string manipulation or implementing algorithms etc. is something I'd
never do in my right mind. Tex macro as an interface layer is fine too,
but I'd rather strip it to the most minimum required.
Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team
Free font developer
To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
More information about the lualatex-dev