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

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Re: Re: Re: Which editor do you use for math***From:*Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>

**References**:**Re: Which editor do you use for math***From:*AES <siegman@stanford.edu>

**Re: Re: Which editor do you use for math***From:*Andrzej Kozlowski <akoz@mimuw.edu.pl>

**Re: Remove In/out names in Kernel / text session**

**Re: two plots in Mathemtica 7. Bug?**

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

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