Mathematica 9 is now available
Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2009

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Re: Re: Which editor do you use for math

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg95754] Re: [mg95722] Re: [mg95704] Re: Which editor do you use for math
  • From: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
  • Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 05:02:45 -0500 (EST)
  • Organization: Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Mass./Amherst
  • References: <gletfq$4nm$1@smc.vnet.net> <200901251152.GAA00679@smc.vnet.net> <200901260247.VAA13894@smc.vnet.net>
  • Reply-to: murray at math.umass.edu

Unless I'm mistaken, Spivak's book is about the amstex macro, not the 
more commonly used (today) LaTeX + AMSLaTeX.

I highly recommend instead Graetzer's "More Math into LaTeX", 4th ed.

Andrzej Kozlowski wrote:
> To anyone who is thinking of using TeX to write some serious  
> mathematics I would also recommend Michael Spivak's "The Joy of  
> TeX" (1990 AMS) together with the AMS macros (which are also included  
> in the more recent AMS-LateX. AMS-Tex works with Plain TeX, which  
> sometimes is more flexible than LateX).
> Spivak's book is very clear and witty, and, for a mathematician, much  
> more accessible than Knuth's rather incomprehensible manual. Yes, the  
> title is rather 1980s and yes, it meant to remind you of what it  
> probably reminds you (if you are old enough, that is).
> 
> As for Donald Knuth, I think the Art of Computer Programing does him  
> more justice as a genius and this book:
> 
> http://www.press.uchicago.edu/presssite/metadata.epl?mode=synopsis&bookkey=22258
> 
> as a writer.
> 
> Andrzej Kozlowski
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 25 Jan 2009, at 12:52, AES wrote:
> 
>> In article <gletfq$4nm$1 at smc.vnet.net>,
>> Bill Rowe <readnews at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> If you are to effectively make use of LaTeX you will definitely
>>> want to get a book written about using LaTeX. Like Mathematica,
>>> LaTeX will require quite a bit of study/usage before you will
>>> really be comfortable using it. I believe the payoff for
>>> learning LaTeX warrants the effort.
>> I'd just add that you might also want to acquire a copy of Knuth's
>> original users guide for TeX, not only for getting a very readable
>> introduction to the basic concepts of TeX itself, but even more just  
>> for
>> the pleasure of reading or scanning it and getting a near-personal
>> encounter with a genuine genius, as well as adding a true classic to
>> your library.
>>
>> (Of course it may also make you weep, which you compare Knuth's  
>> approach
>> to user documentation to Wolfram's current approach.)
>>
>> Last I looked there was one used copy of the original spiralbound
>> paperback TeXBook for sale on amazon for $25.  Given the tattered
>> condition of my original copy, I nearly bought it. The current  
>> hardbound
>> version seems to be retitled as Computers & Typesetting, Volume A: The
>> TeXbook (Computers & Typesetting Series) (Hardcover) and costs a  
>> little
>> more. I'm guessing it contains essentially the same material as the
>> original.
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Murray Eisenberg                     murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower      phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts                413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street            fax   413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305


  • Prev by Date: Re: Remove In/out names in Kernel / text session
  • Next by Date: Re: two plots in Mathemtica 7. Bug?
  • Previous by thread: Re: Re: Which editor do you use for math
  • Next by thread: Re: Re: Re: Re: Which editor do you use for math