As someone who used LaTeX heavily in grad school, using Typst in VSCode to create bespoke invites to an event was quite nice! Would highly recommend giving it a spin.
I was able to use Typst for my thesis, it felt sooo smooth. Turned it into a conference paper half a year later, and had to use the IEEE Latex format to hand it in. Oof, that was humbling.
Not the person you’re asking, but I’ll just mention that pandoc has a Typst reader. I use a pandoc filter to write in markdown with math in Typst and convert to LaTeX:
Typst has a bunch of nice features, it seems like I discover another every time I use it for something. Most recently I saw that you can import TOML (or JSON if you really want) data into the template, making it really simple to populate the content from another tool.
I use typst for all sorts of things in customer apps: conference badges, customer invoices, social media asset generation (like thumbnails for podcasts, customer reviews, etc.), certificates of completion, progress reports, and much more. It's just so robust, efficient and works everywhere. Never again do I need to worry about html formatting to make PDFs.
I find typst a joy to use, either in the online editor or locally. It’s the best combination I’ve yet come across of “write what you mean” - simple markdown-like syntax - with document layout and styling. Happily pay for a subscription even though most of the time I don’t use the online editor. Software worth paying for.
Interesting. What browser? Because in FF or Chrome on Linux desktop, it looks basically identical to LaTeX output. But unlike when creating PDFs, you’re at the mercy of your browser’s MathML implementation (another reason PDF is great).
I just compared typst with peachpdf (c#) and others to generate big reports, invoices, etc. coming from itext 4 the open source version which was lgpl. And was blown away.
Itext was quite efficient because layouting did not do a full css thingy. Which peachpdf does, which of course produces a better looking pdf. But full css eval, could byte your ass with flow elements and div wrappers. You can be extremely non performant and ram hogging pretty fast, especially since peachpdf is not optimized.
However typst? God , it is so fast that downloading and rendering it inside a pdf viewer is the new bottleneck… it generates 2000 page pdfs in second with maximum of 2 gb , however most of the time it used 250mb memory. Peachpdf used 15-30gb for that, heck even itext used 4 gb. Cpu everything was so fucking fast, even while going through p/invoke.
I just fucking love it. I mean sometimes the syntax is weird, but it’s the best layout+data to pdf renderer.
I write this in pretty much every Typst thread.
Here are some notes I wrote when I started out with typst when comparing with LaTeX and some recent additions:
1. It doesn't generate 5 bloody files when compiling.
2. Compiling is instant.
3. Diagnostics are way easier to understand (sort of like Rust compiler suggestion style).
4. List items can be either - item1 - item2, etc. or [item1], [item2]. The latter is way better because you can use anchoring to match on the braces (like "%" in vim), which means navigating long item entries is much easier.
5. In latex you have the \document{...} where you can't specify macros so they need to be at the top, in Typst you can specify the macros close to where you need them. [I've been informed this is actually incorrect and Latex does allow you to specify macros anywhere]
6. It's easier to version control and diff, especially if you use semantic line breaks.
7. Changing page layout, margins, spacing between things, etc., footers with page counters, etc. just seems way easier to do.
8. Compiling with Typst is always one pass.
9. I'm not sure how this would compare with Latex but I'm in law school and needed to cite using AGLC4 which has a CSL (citationstyles.org) template supported by Typst; I have confirmed the CSL XML is correct but doesn't render properly in Typst. The workaround I found was to hand typeset my own citation and bibliography which sucks.
10. Most of what you need is built in to Typst and I've yet to need to import a package or template; even for the most basic documents with Latex you find you'll need to use many packages (such as fancyhdr for customised headers and footers).
11. Latex distributions can be a monstrosity, gigabytes in size like TexLive, and I acknowledge you can get slimmed down on-demand version such as Miktex. There's just one distribution of Typst and its pretty lean, although it might be nice to have multiple implementations in the future.
12. Latex markup looks like an eye-sore, typst reads more naturally as plain-text with a bit of a markdown flavour.
13. Although I loathe discord, I find getting real time support so easy with an almost real time answer to any question I have and the community is heaps friendly; getting support with Latex is not so easy.
I love typst. It's about time we have an authoring system like it that also let's you publish HTML versions of things you write with it instead of just PDFs. Papers in Academia for the longest time have been PDFs, which screen readers are terrible with, mainly because the PDF format is an abomination, and makes accessibility (let alone interoperability) unnecessarily painful.
PDF serves an important purpose; it’s not an abomination. It conveys exactly what the author or publisher intended. HTML can not do this. It can serve as a reliable archive and be made (imperfectly) accessible, as described in the article. Of course all this comes with significant tradeoffs, including reduced interoperability, as you say. But there are good reasons for academic publishing, especially in math, CS, and physics (but also in some areas of the humanities) to prefer PDFs—it’s not just obstinacy.
As someone who used LaTeX heavily in grad school, using Typst in VSCode to create bespoke invites to an event was quite nice! Would highly recommend giving it a spin.
I was able to use Typst for my thesis, it felt sooo smooth. Turned it into a conference paper half a year later, and had to use the IEEE Latex format to hand it in. Oof, that was humbling.
As someone who hasn't used Typst, how manual was the conversion process?
Not the person you’re asking, but I’ll just mention that pandoc has a Typst reader. I use a pandoc filter to write in markdown with math in Typst and convert to LaTeX:
https://lee-phillips.org/typstfilters/
To paraphrase Churchill, LaTeX is the worst form of typesetting experience except for all those other technologies that we've tried.
Glad that that's no longer the case!
Typst has a bunch of nice features, it seems like I discover another every time I use it for something. Most recently I saw that you can import TOML (or JSON if you really want) data into the template, making it really simple to populate the content from another tool.
Yeah, quite useful for generating pdfs for invoices from json
I use Typst for formatting my resume, and it’s been great. Models are pretty good at writing it too if you don’t want to learn the syntax.
I use typst for all sorts of things in customer apps: conference badges, customer invoices, social media asset generation (like thumbnails for podcasts, customer reviews, etc.), certificates of completion, progress reports, and much more. It's just so robust, efficient and works everywhere. Never again do I need to worry about html formatting to make PDFs.
started using typst in the past year.
creating my resume in it felt as magical as it can be.
i loved the tech and ideas behind typst even added native support for it in my WYSIWYG markdown(and typst) editor[1].
[1] https://wander.md
I find typst a joy to use, either in the online editor or locally. It’s the best combination I’ve yet come across of “write what you mean” - simple markdown-like syntax - with document layout and styling. Happily pay for a subscription even though most of the time I don’t use the online editor. Software worth paying for.
The MathML example here is... Definitely not TeX-quality. At least not in my phone. It looks really janky.
Interesting. What browser? Because in FF or Chrome on Linux desktop, it looks basically identical to LaTeX output. But unlike when creating PDFs, you’re at the mercy of your browser’s MathML implementation (another reason PDF is great).
I just compared typst with peachpdf (c#) and others to generate big reports, invoices, etc. coming from itext 4 the open source version which was lgpl. And was blown away. Itext was quite efficient because layouting did not do a full css thingy. Which peachpdf does, which of course produces a better looking pdf. But full css eval, could byte your ass with flow elements and div wrappers. You can be extremely non performant and ram hogging pretty fast, especially since peachpdf is not optimized.
However typst? God , it is so fast that downloading and rendering it inside a pdf viewer is the new bottleneck… it generates 2000 page pdfs in second with maximum of 2 gb , however most of the time it used 250mb memory. Peachpdf used 15-30gb for that, heck even itext used 4 gb. Cpu everything was so fucking fast, even while going through p/invoke.
I just fucking love it. I mean sometimes the syntax is weird, but it’s the best layout+data to pdf renderer.
I write this in pretty much every Typst thread. Here are some notes I wrote when I started out with typst when comparing with LaTeX and some recent additions:
1. It doesn't generate 5 bloody files when compiling.
2. Compiling is instant.
3. Diagnostics are way easier to understand (sort of like Rust compiler suggestion style).
4. List items can be either - item1 - item2, etc. or [item1], [item2]. The latter is way better because you can use anchoring to match on the braces (like "%" in vim), which means navigating long item entries is much easier.
5. In latex you have the \document{...} where you can't specify macros so they need to be at the top, in Typst you can specify the macros close to where you need them. [I've been informed this is actually incorrect and Latex does allow you to specify macros anywhere]
6. It's easier to version control and diff, especially if you use semantic line breaks.
7. Changing page layout, margins, spacing between things, etc., footers with page counters, etc. just seems way easier to do.
8. Compiling with Typst is always one pass.
9. I'm not sure how this would compare with Latex but I'm in law school and needed to cite using AGLC4 which has a CSL (citationstyles.org) template supported by Typst; I have confirmed the CSL XML is correct but doesn't render properly in Typst. The workaround I found was to hand typeset my own citation and bibliography which sucks.
10. Most of what you need is built in to Typst and I've yet to need to import a package or template; even for the most basic documents with Latex you find you'll need to use many packages (such as fancyhdr for customised headers and footers).
11. Latex distributions can be a monstrosity, gigabytes in size like TexLive, and I acknowledge you can get slimmed down on-demand version such as Miktex. There's just one distribution of Typst and its pretty lean, although it might be nice to have multiple implementations in the future.
12. Latex markup looks like an eye-sore, typst reads more naturally as plain-text with a bit of a markdown flavour.
13. Although I loathe discord, I find getting real time support so easy with an almost real time answer to any question I have and the community is heaps friendly; getting support with Latex is not so easy.
I love typst. It's about time we have an authoring system like it that also let's you publish HTML versions of things you write with it instead of just PDFs. Papers in Academia for the longest time have been PDFs, which screen readers are terrible with, mainly because the PDF format is an abomination, and makes accessibility (let alone interoperability) unnecessarily painful.
PDF serves an important purpose; it’s not an abomination. It conveys exactly what the author or publisher intended. HTML can not do this. It can serve as a reliable archive and be made (imperfectly) accessible, as described in the article. Of course all this comes with significant tradeoffs, including reduced interoperability, as you say. But there are good reasons for academic publishing, especially in math, CS, and physics (but also in some areas of the humanities) to prefer PDFs—it’s not just obstinacy.