[OS X TeX] xdvi and/or acrobat reader with darwin ports emacs

[Adam R. Maxwell]

On Jan 22, 2005, at 10:09, Tom Kiffe wrote:



>
> On Jan 22, 2005, at 07:55 AM, Curtis Clifton wrote:
>
>
>> On Jan 22, 2005, at 4:51 AM, Peter Dyballa wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Am 22.01.2005 um 05:59 schrieb David Arnold:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Now, I want to be able to view my tex file in xdvi via emacs. I'd
>>>> also like to set up inverse search, if possible, synching emacs and
>>>> xdvi. I'd also like to be able to open a pdf file via emacs in
>>>> acrobat reader 7.0.
>>>>
>>>
>>> There es no free and native DVI viewer for Mac OS X available, Carbon
>>> or Aqua. MacDVIX from Tom Kiffe needs to be licensed (and has it's 
>>> own
>>> Ghostscript that might need changes to its Fontmap to be able to use
>>> your own PostScript fonts), and TeXniscope from Massimiliano 
>>> Gubinelli
>>> is free but first converts DVI to PDF, so it's rather a PDF viewer.
>>>
>>
>> That's just semantics.

Part of it sounds wrong, too :).  Aqua is a user interface, whereas 
Carbon and Cocoa are APIs.

>> Why does it matter what process TeXniscope uses
>> to display the dvi document?  Shouldn't a hidden-from-the-user
>> conversion for display purposes only matter if that process is too
>> slow.  And only the user can judge that.   As far as I know TeXniscope
>> supports dvi specials for synchronizing, but I may be wrong as I'm a
>> pdflatex user.  I'd appreciate enlightenment as this isn't the first
>> time I've seen TeXniscope derided as not being a DVI viewer, and that
>> doesn't make sense to me.  (I'm a fan of TeXniscope for PDF viewing.
>> Massimiliano has done great work and a great service.)
>>

Please enlighten me as well.  Speed and antialiasing seem to be the 
primary differences AFAICT, but I'm also a pdflatex user, so there's 
probably something here that I just don't get.

> I didn't realize that the difference between an airplane, a train, and 
> an automobile is just
> semantics. After all, each can be used to travel from New York to Los 
> Angeles. By the above
> reasoning we can call an automobile a train or an airplane.
>

Curt's reasoning suggests to me that an automobile, train, and airplane 
are all forms of transportation; as long as you just need to travel 
from New York to LA, you make your choice of implementation based on 
time and cost.  At some level, Quartz turns everything it displays into 
PDF anyway, so maybe they're all PDF viewers.

-- 
Adam

--------------------- Info ---------------------
Mac-TeX Website: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
           & FAQ: http://latex.yauh.de/faq/
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
List Post: <mailto:MacOSX-TeX at email.esm.psu.edu>