[OS X TeX] is terminal sufficient?
markoilcan at yahoo.com
Tue Jun 28 18:26:20 CEST 2005
--- Bruno Voisin <bvoisin at mac.com> wrote:
> Le 28 juin 05 à 17:25, Aaron Jackson a écrit :
> > TeX, like every other ancient UNIX program, was designed to use the
> > terminal because GUI's didn't exist. The only thing that TexShop
> > provides is a nice easy non-UNIX way to edit documents. I suppose
> > a purest would consider that lazy...
I am also someone who hasn't found a particular use for programs such
as TexShop or iTexMac. There are a variety of frills these programs
provide, which can, understandably, appeal to some people but don't
really contribute to my personal workflow. I find that 99% of the time
I'm just using a text editor, so finding an editor I'm happy with is
most important. It's possbile to use your choice of editors in TexShop,
at least, although pico may not be an option. You may find, after you
start to create larger and more complicated documents that the added
frills are beneficial, or, like me, you may not.
> - The various OS X ports of Emacs, which generally include AUCTeX and
> sometimes more. It's difficult to say more not being an Emacs user
> myself, but there's:
> Enhanced Carbon Emacs <http://www.inf.unibz.it/~franconi/mac-
> emacs/> (no longer developed, but widely used)
> Carbon Emacs <http://home.att.ne.jp/alpha/z123/emacs-mac-e.html>
> Yet Another Carbon Emacs Distribution <http://
> AquaMacs <http://aquamacs.org/>
> Emacs on Aqua <http://emacs-on-aqua.sourceforge.net/>
For the record, there's also Carbon Xemacs
Carbon Xemacs doesn't come as a binary so you do have to execute the
(rather simple) build instructions.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search.
--------------------- 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>
More information about the macostex-archives