[TUHS] TeX and groff (was: roff(7))

[Blake McBride]

On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 6:45 PM Jon Forrest <nobozo at gmail.com> wrote:

>  I know of
> a full C reimplementation that passes the test but the author doesn't
> want to make it free software.
>

Although it is possible, I find this hard to believe.  I can't imagine
spending as much time as would be required to duplicate something that
already exists.


>
> There are other rewrites out there that could be candidates but someone
> will enough power will have to proclaim one as the official TeX
> alternative.
>

Again, hard to believe.


>
>  > 2.  Drop DVI?  Are you kidding me?  Although PDF may be popular now,
>  > that may not be the case 20 years from now.  A device-independent
>  > format is what is needed, and that's what DVI is.  TeX is guaranteed
>  > to produce the exact same output 100 years from now.
>
> And .PDF isn't?
>

No.  It isn't.  It is an Adobe product.


>
> .DVI was great until .PDF matured. .DVI has almost no penetration
> these days, whereas .PDF is everywhere.


DVI was never meant to have any penetration.  It was always intended to be
an intermediary format.



> I'm not saying that .PDF
> will always be the proper alternative but a properly rewritten TeX
> should make it much easier to replace .PDF will whatever comes
> next.
>

Again, given the complexity of a proper TeX, and its declining popularity,
I find it ver hard to believe that someone would spend the time to
duplicate, with enhancements, it.

Blake McBride
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20220111/71197ad2/attachment.htm>