Re: [9fans] [RFC] fonts and unicode/utf [TeX]
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 02:43:32PM -0400, Michael Kerpan wrote: Modern TeX implementations like XeTeX and LuaTeX handle UTF-8 natively and also bring all sorts of benefits like OpenType support (automagic ligatures, real small caps, selectable lining or old-style figures and more) and the ability to define fonts from the system font pool rather than using archaic incantations and magic scrolls from the early 90s. I don't know what automagic ligatures are; but ligatures are here in the kerTeX fonts, user having nothing special to do to have them. Small caps are here. Using the system fonts is here too, at least for T1 fonts: afm2tfm(1) makes them available. For other fonts format, writing a whatever2tfm(1) will do the job. And archaic is definitively a marketing sentence, not a scientific judgement: Euclid? Well... it was perhaps good for the epoch... The problem is that these modern implementations are HUGE. On the average Linux system, TeX, LaTeX and other paraphernalia seem to take up well over 1 GB these days. I've given up on TeX because it's just so darn big. So have I. There is, however, hope. Heirloom troff manages to include many of the same whizz-bang typographic features as XeTeX and friends (including Unicode support, smartfont support, easy loading of fonts in modern formats) while taking up about 1/100th the resource footprint. Clearly what we REALLY need is a filter that takes LaTeX sources and processes them into TROFF commands to feed to a port of Heirloom troff ;) kerTeX is 1/100th of the current TeX distributions and is C89, that is the most portable. It lacks some Heirloom troff features, but it is for text and mathematics, includes a font designer: METAFONT, a figure designer: MetaPost and a bunch of debugging utilities, coding utilities (WEB), fonts and a state of the art documentation. So I stick to kerTeX. And I have recorded what _you_ propose to do ;) Since you seem to claim that the way _you are engaged in_ is easier than the road I have taken, you should have finished before I have finished kerTeX, rendering it /* sigh */ obsolete... Not to mention that I can work on kerTeX only during limited slots of time, since my main developing time is for a huge beast: KerGIS. And it should be noted that I manage alone forks of G.R.A.S.S. and TeX and al., while millions of users! thousands of programmers! hundreds of developers! seem to be unable to evolve correctly the community driven equivalents... So imagine what one can achieve if one can concentrate on a far more limited scale? But beware of the tortoise... This is a lesson GPL fanatics have learned: say, by principle, that free software is perfect, and closed source one a desaster. Why? Simply because if someone criticizes open source code the answer is immediate: code is here, be my guest. While, with closed source, one can spend gallons of electronic ink saying: This sucks ! If only I had the code -- Thierry Laronde tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com http://www.kergis.com/ Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89 250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C
Re: [9fans] troff .sp absolute movement problem
.LP aaa .sp |0i bbb I expected bbb to appear at the top of the page. Exactly this happens in groff: groff -ms t t.ps however not with 9 troff -ms t |tr2post t.ps. The same problem appears with the Heirloom troff, too. It seems, however, that when .sp |0i is replaced with .sp |0.0001i the result is as expected. Only the zero value does not work... R.
Re: [9fans] SIP
Anyone working on or have a simple SIP router/proxy for Plan9? As of today I will no longer waste days of my life dealing with the abomination that is Asterisk. I would also love to see a SIP implementation for Plan 9, I've contemplated it a number of times, but the sheer volume of SIP RFCs is not encouraging! And porting something like SER (never Asterisk) appears even harder. That said, I've thought a good bit about a sensible way to implement a SIP proxy, and I'll be thinking about it a good bit more now... -- All original matter is hereby placed immediately under the public domain.
Re: [9fans] [RFC] fonts and unicode/utf [TeX]
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 3:57 AM, tlaro...@polynum.com wrote: I don't know what automagic ligatures are; but ligatures are here in the kerTeX fonts, user having nothing special to do to have them. Small caps are here. Using the system fonts is here too, at least for T1 fonts: afm2tfm(1) makes them available. For other fonts format, writing a whatever2tfm(1) will do the job. In general using a simple Type 1 font isn't going to get you things like true small caps, ligatures (beyond maybe the basic fi and fl) or the ability to choose between old-style and lining figures. The 256 glyph limit means that you had to split things up into multiple fonts, This works well enough for simply creating a PostScript file that will be fed straight to a laser printer, but for creating searchable PDF files, it's far from ideal. In TeX, it also require a lot of manual work above and beyond what would be needed to get those features using Computer Modern. With OpenType support (and using OpenType fonts, of course), typographic features become as easy to use with third-party fonts as they are with Computer Modern. And archaic is definitively a marketing sentence, not a scientific judgement: Euclid? Well... it was perhaps good for the epoch... True enough. it's more my opinion than anything else. Still, it must be an opinion shared by someone else, given the widespread use of fontspec wherever available compared to the older methods. The problem is that these modern implementations are HUGE. On the average Linux system, TeX, LaTeX and other paraphernalia seem to take up well over 1 GB these days. I've given up on TeX because it's just so darn big. So have I. kerTeX is 1/100th of the current TeX distributions and is C89, that is the most portable. It lacks some Heirloom troff features, but it is for text and mathematics, includes a font designer: METAFONT, a figure designer: MetaPost and a bunch of debugging utilities, coding utilities (WEB), fonts and a state of the art documentation. I'm not disparaging your work. In fact I think its pretty good. I was mainly trying to point out the problems that have arisen in some modern TeX distros in the past. So I stick to kerTeX. And I have recorded what _you_ propose to do ;) Since you seem to claim that the way _you are engaged in_ is easier than the road I have taken, you should have finished before I have finished kerTeX, rendering it /* sigh */ obsolete... I doubt that, as tounge-in-cheek suggestions seldom seem to turn into working ideas (at least when they come from me)
[9fans] hgfs
wrote a hgfs for plan9 that gives you read only access to all revisions in a mercurial repository. it provides a directory per revision. the revision directory can use decimal revision number: 123/ or f32acf03d/ this is a first step towards native tools for plan9 to work with mercurial. in plan9front, we forced ourselfs to use the python hg implementation -- cinap
[9fans] hgfs
forgot the mention some bits: hgfs gives you one directory per revision. a revision dir looks like this: cpu% cd /n/hg/99 cpu% ls -l d-r-xr-xr-x M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 0 Apr 17 22:19 changes d-r-xr-xr-x M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 0 Apr 17 22:19 files --r--r--r-- M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 157 Apr 17 22:19 log --r--r--r-- M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 16 Apr 17 22:19 rev1 --r--r--r-- M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 0 Apr 17 22:19 rev2 --r--r--r-- M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 25 Apr 17 22:19 who --r--r--r-- M 37623 stanley.lieber hgfs 56 Apr 17 22:19 why files/ contains the whole snapshot. changes/ is like files, but contains only the files that where changed in that revision. log is the raw mercurial changelog entry. rev1 and rev2 contain the directory names of the parent revisions. the who file contains the commiter and why the commit message. i'm thinking about providing some history(1) like rc scripts that help with some daily tasks. any suggestions and ideas are welcome. source: /n/sources/contrib/cinap_lenrek/hgfs.tgz http://9hal.ath.cx/usr/cinap_lenrek/hgfs.tgz -- cinap
