Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Georg Baum]

Liviu Andronic wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org wrote:
 
 my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in
 an external
 editor would help?

 As it happens, this is the subject of:
 http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/7404
 
 Georg even provided a patch, and I suspect it requires not much
 programming to polish up that patch for inclusion.

Indeed, at least a a part of the requested feature should be easy to 
integrate. However, I still don't have enough time, so if anybody wants to 
chime in it would be most welcome (and of course I'll happily answer any 
question).

 I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on
 whatever we get,
 and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is possible.
 I.e., we'd have
 a sort of generic ERT--LyX routine.

 I think this would be a nice touch, indeed.

Should already work: Copy ERT, then Edit-Paste special-from LaTeX, then 
delete ERT. I guess you could even bind a command sequence to a custom key 
shortcut, so that you can type LaTeX, and having it interpreted by a single 
key combination.


Georg

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Georg Baum]

Liviu Andronic wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org wrote:
 
 my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in
 an external
 editor would help?

 As it happens, this is the subject of:
 http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/7404
 
 Georg even provided a patch, and I suspect it requires not much
 programming to polish up that patch for inclusion.

Indeed, at least a a part of the requested feature should be easy to 
integrate. However, I still don't have enough time, so if anybody wants to 
chime in it would be most welcome (and of course I'll happily answer any 
question).

 I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on
 whatever we get,
 and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is possible.
 I.e., we'd have
 a sort of generic ERT--LyX routine.

 I think this would be a nice touch, indeed.

Should already work: Copy ERT, then Edit-Paste special-from LaTeX, then 
delete ERT. I guess you could even bind a command sequence to a custom key 
shortcut, so that you can type LaTeX, and having it interpreted by a single 
key combination.


Georg

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Georg Baum]

Liviu Andronic wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Richard Heck  wrote:
> 
>> my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in
>> an external
>> editor would help?
>>
> As it happens, this is the subject of:
> http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/7404
> 
> Georg even provided a patch, and I suspect it requires not much
> programming to polish up that patch for inclusion.

Indeed, at least a a part of the requested feature should be easy to 
integrate. However, I still don't have enough time, so if anybody wants to 
chime in it would be most welcome (and of course I'll happily answer any 
question).

>> I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on
>> whatever we get,
>> and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is possible.
>> I.e., we'd have
>> a sort of generic ERT-->LyX routine.
>>
> I think this would be a nice touch, indeed.

Should already work: Copy ERT, then Edit->Paste special->from LaTeX, then 
delete ERT. I guess you could even bind a command sequence to a custom key 
shortcut, so that you can type LaTeX, and having it interpreted by a single 
key combination.


Georg

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Guenter Milde]

On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
shortkey-list. 

(Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX - but
this is a large part of the LyX user base.)

Günter

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/10/2015 04:42 AM, Madhusudan Singh wrote:

TeXmacs is a good alternative.

Hiding away preamble stuff has always been sufficiently problematic 
for me for me not to take to LyX.


Do you mean that you can't see the preamble stuff in the LyX document? 
There is an easy solution to this, if so.


Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/10/2015 04:13 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:

On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:


Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
shortkey-list.


Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

So something along the lines of:
- activate math-like completion as in \
- propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
- run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
- if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
everything right and cover all potential complications...


The idea of having an ERT-like box that supported completion, syntax 
highlighting, etc,
is one I've had before. But then we're talking about integrating 
something like a LaTeX
edtior into LyX, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, from LyX's 
point of view,
especially given that, like most FOSS projects, we are very short of 
programming time.
And, as Benedict says, if one really wants to do that kind of thing, 
then at least a very
good alternative is an Input inset, which one can then edit with a real 
editor (Kile, in
my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in 
an external
editor would help? I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on 
whatever we get,
and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is 
possible. I.e., we'd have
a sort of generic ERT--LyX routine. I *think* that some parts of what 
is required here

already exist in the Advanced FR machinery.

Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Liviu Andronic]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org wrote:
 On 06/10/2015 04:13 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:

 On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such
 features.

 I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
 search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

 The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
 insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
 these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
 shortkey-list.

 Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
 implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
 less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

 So something along the lines of:
 - activate math-like completion as in \
 - propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
 of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
 - run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
 - if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

 But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
 everything right and cover all potential complications...


 The idea of having an ERT-like box that supported completion, syntax
 highlighting, etc,
 is one I've had before. But then we're talking about integrating something
 like a LaTeX
 edtior into LyX, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, from LyX's point
 of view,
 especially given that, like most FOSS projects, we are very short of
 programming time.
 And, as Benedict says, if one really wants to do that kind of thing, then at
 least a very
 good alternative is an Input inset, which one can then edit with a real
 editor (Kile, in

 my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in an
 external
 editor would help?

As it happens, this is the subject of:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/7404

Georg even provided a patch, and I suspect it requires not much
programming to polish up that patch for inclusion.


 I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on
 whatever we get,
 and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is possible.
 I.e., we'd have
 a sort of generic ERT--LyX routine.

I think this would be a nice touch, indeed.

Regards,
Liviu


 I *think* that some parts of what is
 required here
 already exist in the Advanced FR machinery.

 Richard




-- 
Do you think you know what math is?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
Or what it means to be intelligent?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
Think again:
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Liviu Andronic]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:
 On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

 I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
 search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

 The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
 insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
 these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
 shortkey-list.

Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

So something along the lines of:
- activate math-like completion as in \
- propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
- run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
- if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
everything right and cover all potential complications...

Liviu


 (Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX - but
 this is a large part of the LyX user base.)

 Günter




-- 
Do you think you know what math is?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
Or what it means to be intelligent?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
Think again:
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Madhusudan Singh]

TeXmacs is a good alternative.

Hiding away preamble stuff has always been sufficiently problematic for me
for me not to take to LyX.

I have not much used TeXmacs but it has a lot of this and more.

For my documents, I stick to LaTeX with a live preview. Just can't beat
that kind of power.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Liviu Andronic landronim...@gmail.com
wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:
  On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:
 
  Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
  understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such
 features.
 
  I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
  search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.
 
  The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
  insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
  these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
  shortkey-list.
 
 Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
 implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
 less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

 So something along the lines of:
 - activate math-like completion as in \
 - propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
 of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
 - run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
 - if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

 But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
 everything right and cover all potential complications...

 Liviu


  (Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX -
 but
  this is a large part of the LyX user base.)
 
  Günter
 



 --
 Do you think you know what math is?
 http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
 Or what it means to be intelligent?
 http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
 Think again:
 http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Guenter Milde]

On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
shortkey-list. 

(Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX - but
this is a large part of the LyX user base.)

Günter

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Liviu Andronic]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:
 On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

 I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
 search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

 The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
 insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
 these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
 shortkey-list.

Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

So something along the lines of:
- activate math-like completion as in \
- propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
- run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
- if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
everything right and cover all potential complications...

Liviu


 (Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX - but
 this is a large part of the LyX user base.)

 Günter




-- 
Do you think you know what math is?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
Or what it means to be intelligent?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
Think again:
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Madhusudan Singh]

TeXmacs is a good alternative.

Hiding away preamble stuff has always been sufficiently problematic for me
for me not to take to LyX.

I have not much used TeXmacs but it has a lot of this and more.

For my documents, I stick to LaTeX with a live preview. Just can't beat
that kind of power.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Liviu Andronic landronim...@gmail.com
wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:
  On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:
 
  Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
  understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such
 features.
 
  I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
  search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.
 
  The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
  insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
  these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
  shortkey-list.
 
 Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
 implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
 less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

 So something along the lines of:
 - activate math-like completion as in \
 - propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
 of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
 - run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
 - if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

 But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
 everything right and cover all potential complications...

 Liviu


  (Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX -
 but
  this is a large part of the LyX user base.)
 
  Günter
 



 --
 Do you think you know what math is?
 http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
 Or what it means to be intelligent?
 http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
 Think again:
 http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/10/2015 04:13 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:

On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:


Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
shortkey-list.


Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

So something along the lines of:
- activate math-like completion as in \
- propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
- run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
- if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
everything right and cover all potential complications...


The idea of having an ERT-like box that supported completion, syntax 
highlighting, etc,
is one I've had before. But then we're talking about integrating 
something like a LaTeX
edtior into LyX, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, from LyX's 
point of view,
especially given that, like most FOSS projects, we are very short of 
programming time.
And, as Benedict says, if one really wants to do that kind of thing, 
then at least a very
good alternative is an Input inset, which one can then edit with a real 
editor (Kile, in
my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in 
an external
editor would help? I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on 
whatever we get,
and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is 
possible. I.e., we'd have
a sort of generic ERT--LyX routine. I *think* that some parts of what 
is required here

already exist in the Advanced FR machinery.

Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/10/2015 04:42 AM, Madhusudan Singh wrote:

TeXmacs is a good alternative.

Hiding away preamble stuff has always been sufficiently problematic 
for me for me not to take to LyX.


Do you mean that you can't see the preamble stuff in the LyX document? 
There is an easy solution to this, if so.


Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Liviu Andronic]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org wrote:
 On 06/10/2015 04:13 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:

 On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde mi...@users.sf.net wrote:

 On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such
 features.

 I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
 search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

 The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
 insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
 these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
 shortkey-list.

 Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
 implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
 less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

 So something along the lines of:
 - activate math-like completion as in \
 - propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
 of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
 - run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
 - if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

 But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
 everything right and cover all potential complications...


 The idea of having an ERT-like box that supported completion, syntax
 highlighting, etc,
 is one I've had before. But then we're talking about integrating something
 like a LaTeX
 edtior into LyX, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, from LyX's point
 of view,
 especially given that, like most FOSS projects, we are very short of
 programming time.
 And, as Benedict says, if one really wants to do that kind of thing, then at
 least a very
 good alternative is an Input inset, which one can then edit with a real
 editor (Kile, in

 my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in an
 external
 editor would help?

As it happens, this is the subject of:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/7404

Georg even provided a patch, and I suspect it requires not much
programming to polish up that patch for inclusion.


 I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on
 whatever we get,
 and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is possible.
 I.e., we'd have
 a sort of generic ERT--LyX routine.

I think this would be a nice touch, indeed.

Regards,
Liviu


 I *think* that some parts of what is
 required here
 already exist in the Advanced FR machinery.

 Richard




-- 
Do you think you know what math is?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
Or what it means to be intelligent?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
Think again:
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Guenter Milde]

On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:

> Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
> understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
shortkey-list. 

(Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX - but
this is a large part of the LyX user base.)

Günter

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Liviu Andronic]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde  wrote:
> On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:
>
>> Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
>> understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.
>
> I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
> search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.
>
> The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
> insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
> these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
> shortkey-list.
>
Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

So something along the lines of:
- activate math-like completion as in "\"
- propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
- run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
- if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
everything right and cover all potential complications...

Liviu


> (Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX - but
> this is a large part of the LyX user base.)
>
> Günter
>



-- 
Do you think you know what math is?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
Or what it means to be intelligent?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
Think again:
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Madhusudan Singh]

TeXmacs is a good alternative.

Hiding away preamble stuff has always been sufficiently problematic for me
for me not to take to LyX.

I have not much used TeXmacs but it has a lot of this and more.

For my documents, I stick to LaTeX with a live preview. Just can't beat
that kind of power.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Liviu Andronic 
wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde  wrote:
> > On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:
> >
> >> Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
> >> understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such
> features.
> >
> > I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
> > search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.
> >
> > The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
> > insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
> > these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
> > shortkey-list.
> >
> Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
> implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
> less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.
>
> So something along the lines of:
> - activate math-like completion as in "\"
> - propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
> of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
> - run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
> - if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT
>
> But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
> everything right and cover all potential complications...
>
> Liviu
>
>
> > (Of course, this is from the view point of someone familiar with LaTeX -
> but
> > this is a large part of the LyX user base.)
> >
> > Günter
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Do you think you know what math is?
> http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
> Or what it means to be intelligent?
> http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
> Think again:
> http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library
>

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/10/2015 04:13 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde  wrote:

On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:


Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.

The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
shortkey-list.


Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.

So something along the lines of:
- activate math-like completion as in "\"
- propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
- run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
- if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT

But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
everything right and cover all potential complications...


The idea of having an ERT-like box that supported completion, syntax 
highlighting, etc,
is one I've had before. But then we're talking about integrating 
something like a LaTeX
edtior into LyX, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, from LyX's 
point of view,
especially given that, like most FOSS projects, we are very short of 
programming time.
And, as Benedict says, if one really wants to do that kind of thing, 
then at least a very
good alternative is an Input inset, which one can then edit with a real 
editor (Kile, in
my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in 
an external
editor would help? I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on 
whatever we get,
and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is 
possible. I.e., we'd have
a sort of generic ERT-->LyX routine. I *think* that some parts of what 
is required here

already exist in the Advanced F machinery.

Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/10/2015 04:42 AM, Madhusudan Singh wrote:

TeXmacs is a good alternative.

Hiding away preamble stuff has always been sufficiently problematic 
for me for me not to take to LyX.


Do you mean that you can't see the preamble stuff in the LyX document? 
There is an easy solution to this, if so.


Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Liviu Andronic]

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Richard Heck  wrote:
> On 06/10/2015 04:13 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Guenter Milde  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2015-06-10, Benedict Holland wrote:
>>>
 Since there are already excellent Latex editors, I don't
 understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such
 features.
>>>
>>> I love LyX, because I can input math from the keyboard, without click and
>>> search in menus and dragging around - just using familiar LaTeX syntax.
>>>
>>> The same would apply for many smaller edits (font changes, package
>>> insertions, ...): if the source view were edible, I could do many of
>>> these changes fast and per keyboard without searching in menus or the
>>> shortkey-list.
>>>
>> Maybe some sort of math-like tab-activated completion could be
>> implemented, for commands that LyX supports natively... There'd be
>> less scope for getting it wrong in such a set-up.
>>
>> So something along the lines of:
>> - activate math-like completion as in "\"
>> - propose a list of completion possibilities given an exclusive list
>> of commands that LyX understands and supports natively
>> - run tex2lyx on the input when user signals they're done
>> - if something didn't go to plan, spit out ERT
>>
>> But I expect this wouldn't be a trivial implementation to get
>> everything right and cover all potential complications...
>
>
> The idea of having an ERT-like box that supported completion, syntax
> highlighting, etc,
> is one I've had before. But then we're talking about integrating something
> like a LaTeX
> edtior into LyX, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, from LyX's point
> of view,
> especially given that, like most FOSS projects, we are very short of
> programming time.
> And, as Benedict says, if one really wants to do that kind of thing, then at
> least a very
> good alternative is an Input inset, which one can then edit with a real
> editor (Kile, in

> my case). I wonder if just having the option of opening an ERT itself in an
> external
> editor would help?
>
As it happens, this is the subject of:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/7404

Georg even provided a patch, and I suspect it requires not much
programming to polish up that patch for inclusion.


> I suppose it might be an option to run tex2lyx on
> whatever we get,
> and replace the ERT inset with the result, in so far as that is possible.
> I.e., we'd have
> a sort of generic ERT-->LyX routine.
>
I think this would be a nice touch, indeed.

Regards,
Liviu


> I *think* that some parts of what is
> required here
> already exist in the Advanced F machinery.
>
> Richard
>



-- 
Do you think you know what math is?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02
Or what it means to be intelligent?
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30
Think again:
http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:
 Hi there,
 
 I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX. 

Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
feedback from new users, in my opinion.

 I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source 
 LaTEX file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival 
 against the other LaTEX editors.
 I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
 would like to change or add code directly to the source file.
 
 Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where 
 I can find it?

This is an often requested feature. See for example:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
seamless two-way communication.

Best,

Scott

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Christopher Menzel]

Hi Ricardo,

Can you provide an example of a situation where the feature in question 
would be useful? I composed in raw LaTeX for 20 years but since 
switching pretty much full-time to LyX several years ago I have yet to 
find a situation that LyX (plus perhaps a little ERT 
http://wiki.lyx.org/FAQ/ERT)  couldn't handle with aplomb.


-chris

Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

Hi there,

I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.
I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source LaTEX 
file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival against 
the other LaTEX editors.
I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where I 
can find it?

Keep the good work!

Best regards,
Ricardo Gaspar

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/09/2015 06:13 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

Hi there,

I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.

Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
feedback from new users, in my opinion.


I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source LaTEX 
file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival against 
the other LaTEX editors.
I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where I 
can find it?

This is an often requested feature. See for example:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
seamless two-way communication.


Yes, the basic problem is that this is highly non-trivial, though not 
impossible, and it isn't
really compatible with the idea behind LyX. Contrary to how it is often 
advertised, LyX is
NOT a LaTeX frontend. LaTeX is only one of the formats we natively 
export (though by far

the most important).

The ability to edit the LaTeX would basically involve offering the user 
the LaTeX source
for some fragment of text, then running tex2lyx on whatever the user 
ended up with, then
replacing the relevant fragment of text witih the result. This is still 
harder than it sounds,
since tex2lyx outputs some text (a LyX file, basically), and what we 
really need is the data
structure that LyX would create upon reading that file. This could be 
done, though, by reading
the new text into a temporary Buffer and doing some kind of cut and 
paste behind the scenes.
But there's not really any guarantee that what LyX would export at that 
point would actually
be the same as what the user entered: That kind of 'roundtrip' is a 
goal, not a reality.


Alternatively, the LaTeX the user created could become ERT. But then 
maybe such a user

should just use LaTeX.

Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Benedict Holland]

I have to plug emacs for native lyx support. That application is awesome at
parsing raw Latex. As Richard said, this is the antithesis of why anyone
would use Lyx. I have become a huge fan of seamlessly integrating my latex
documents, mostly tables, using the input command and editing the .tex file
using emacs. Since there is already excellent Latex editors, I don't
understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

~Ben

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org wrote:

 On 06/09/2015 06:13 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:

 On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

 Hi there,

 I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.

 Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
 keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
 interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
 the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
 feedback from new users, in my opinion.

  I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source
 LaTEX file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival
 against the other LaTEX editors.
 I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes
 I would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

 Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site
 where I can find it?

 This is an often requested feature. See for example:
 http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
 http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

 The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
 hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
 to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
 seamless two-way communication.


 Yes, the basic problem is that this is highly non-trivial, though not
 impossible, and it isn't
 really compatible with the idea behind LyX. Contrary to how it is often
 advertised, LyX is
 NOT a LaTeX frontend. LaTeX is only one of the formats we natively export
 (though by far
 the most important).

 The ability to edit the LaTeX would basically involve offering the user
 the LaTeX source
 for some fragment of text, then running tex2lyx on whatever the user ended
 up with, then
 replacing the relevant fragment of text witih the result. This is still
 harder than it sounds,
 since tex2lyx outputs some text (a LyX file, basically), and what we
 really need is the data
 structure that LyX would create upon reading that file. This could be
 done, though, by reading
 the new text into a temporary Buffer and doing some kind of cut and paste
 behind the scenes.
 But there's not really any guarantee that what LyX would export at that
 point would actually
 be the same as what the user entered: That kind of 'roundtrip' is a goal,
 not a reality.

 Alternatively, the LaTeX the user created could become ERT. But then maybe
 such a user
 should just use LaTeX.

 Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:
 Hi there,
 
 I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX. 

Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
feedback from new users, in my opinion.

 I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source 
 LaTEX file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival 
 against the other LaTEX editors.
 I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
 would like to change or add code directly to the source file.
 
 Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where 
 I can find it?

This is an often requested feature. See for example:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
seamless two-way communication.

Best,

Scott

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Christopher Menzel]

Hi Ricardo,

Can you provide an example of a situation where the feature in question 
would be useful? I composed in raw LaTeX for 20 years but since 
switching pretty much full-time to LyX several years ago I have yet to 
find a situation that LyX (plus perhaps a little ERT 
http://wiki.lyx.org/FAQ/ERT)  couldn't handle with aplomb.


-chris

Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

Hi there,

I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.
I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source LaTEX 
file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival against 
the other LaTEX editors.
I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where I 
can find it?

Keep the good work!

Best regards,
Ricardo Gaspar

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/09/2015 06:13 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

Hi there,

I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.

Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
feedback from new users, in my opinion.


I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source LaTEX 
file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival against 
the other LaTEX editors.
I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where I 
can find it?

This is an often requested feature. See for example:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
seamless two-way communication.


Yes, the basic problem is that this is highly non-trivial, though not 
impossible, and it isn't
really compatible with the idea behind LyX. Contrary to how it is often 
advertised, LyX is
NOT a LaTeX frontend. LaTeX is only one of the formats we natively 
export (though by far

the most important).

The ability to edit the LaTeX would basically involve offering the user 
the LaTeX source
for some fragment of text, then running tex2lyx on whatever the user 
ended up with, then
replacing the relevant fragment of text witih the result. This is still 
harder than it sounds,
since tex2lyx outputs some text (a LyX file, basically), and what we 
really need is the data
structure that LyX would create upon reading that file. This could be 
done, though, by reading
the new text into a temporary Buffer and doing some kind of cut and 
paste behind the scenes.
But there's not really any guarantee that what LyX would export at that 
point would actually
be the same as what the user entered: That kind of 'roundtrip' is a 
goal, not a reality.


Alternatively, the LaTeX the user created could become ERT. But then 
maybe such a user

should just use LaTeX.

Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Benedict Holland]

I have to plug emacs for native lyx support. That application is awesome at
parsing raw Latex. As Richard said, this is the antithesis of why anyone
would use Lyx. I have become a huge fan of seamlessly integrating my latex
documents, mostly tables, using the input command and editing the .tex file
using emacs. Since there is already excellent Latex editors, I don't
understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

~Ben

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Richard Heck rgh...@lyx.org wrote:

 On 06/09/2015 06:13 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:

 On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

 Hi there,

 I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.

 Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
 keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
 interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
 the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
 feedback from new users, in my opinion.

  I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source
 LaTEX file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival
 against the other LaTEX editors.
 I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes
 I would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

 Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site
 where I can find it?

 This is an often requested feature. See for example:
 http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
 http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

 The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
 hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
 to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
 seamless two-way communication.


 Yes, the basic problem is that this is highly non-trivial, though not
 impossible, and it isn't
 really compatible with the idea behind LyX. Contrary to how it is often
 advertised, LyX is
 NOT a LaTeX frontend. LaTeX is only one of the formats we natively export
 (though by far
 the most important).

 The ability to edit the LaTeX would basically involve offering the user
 the LaTeX source
 for some fragment of text, then running tex2lyx on whatever the user ended
 up with, then
 replacing the relevant fragment of text witih the result. This is still
 harder than it sounds,
 since tex2lyx outputs some text (a LyX file, basically), and what we
 really need is the data
 structure that LyX would create upon reading that file. This could be
 done, though, by reading
 the new text into a temporary Buffer and doing some kind of cut and paste
 behind the scenes.
 But there's not really any guarantee that what LyX would export at that
 point would actually
 be the same as what the user entered: That kind of 'roundtrip' is a goal,
 not a reality.

 Alternatively, the LaTeX the user created could become ERT. But then maybe
 such a user
 should just use LaTeX.

 Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Scott Kostyshak]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX. 

Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
feedback from new users, in my opinion.

> I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source 
> LaTEX file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival 
> against the other LaTEX editors.
> I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
> would like to change or add code directly to the source file.
> 
> Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where 
> I can find it?

This is an often requested feature. See for example:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
seamless two-way communication.

Best,

Scott

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Christopher Menzel]

Hi Ricardo,

Can you provide an example of a situation where the feature in question 
would be useful? I composed in raw LaTeX for 20 years but since 
switching pretty much full-time to LyX several years ago I have yet to 
find a situation that LyX (plus perhaps a little ERT 
)  couldn't handle with aplomb.


-chris

Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

Hi there,

I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.
I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source LaTEX 
file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival against 
the other LaTEX editors.
I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where I 
can find it?

Keep the good work!

Best regards,
Ricardo Gaspar

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Richard Heck]

On 06/09/2015 06:13 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:

On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:

Hi there,

I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.

Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
feedback from new users, in my opinion.


I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source LaTEX 
file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival against 
the other LaTEX editors.
I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes I 
would like to change or add code directly to the source file.

Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site where I 
can find it?

This is an often requested feature. See for example:
http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260

The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
seamless two-way communication.


Yes, the basic problem is that this is highly non-trivial, though not 
impossible, and it isn't
really compatible with the idea behind LyX. Contrary to how it is often 
advertised, LyX is
NOT a LaTeX frontend. LaTeX is only one of the formats we natively 
export (though by far

the most important).

The ability to edit the LaTeX would basically involve offering the user 
the LaTeX source
for some fragment of text, then running tex2lyx on whatever the user 
ended up with, then
replacing the relevant fragment of text witih the result. This is still 
harder than it sounds,
since tex2lyx outputs some text (a LyX file, basically), and what we 
really need is the data
structure that LyX would create upon reading that file. This could be 
done, though, by reading
the new text into a temporary Buffer and doing some kind of cut and 
paste behind the scenes.
But there's not really any guarantee that what LyX would export at that 
point would actually
be the same as what the user entered: That kind of 'roundtrip' is a 
goal, not a reality.


Alternatively, the LaTeX the user created could become ERT. But then 
maybe such a user

should just use LaTeX.

Richard

Re: Suggestion to improve Lyx for LaTEX users

[Benedict Holland]

I have to plug emacs for native lyx support. That application is awesome at
parsing raw Latex. As Richard said, this is the antithesis of why anyone
would use Lyx. I have become a huge fan of seamlessly integrating my latex
documents, mostly tables, using the input command and editing the .tex file
using emacs. Since there is already excellent Latex editors, I don't
understand why it would be desirable for Lyx to incorporate such features.

~Ben

On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 10:13 PM, Richard Heck  wrote:

> On 06/09/2015 06:13 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 10:00:25PM +0100, Ricardo Gaspar wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> I am a new user of Lyx, but a not a beginner in LaTEX.
>>>
>> Hi Ricardo, and welcome! It's nice to have a fresh perspective. Please
>> keep providing feedback and if you happen to have the time and
>> interests, patches or (if you do not enjoy programming) improvements to
>> the documentation would be welcome. It's especially useful to receive
>> feedback from new users, in my opinion.
>>
>>  I couldn’t find in the internet why Lyx doesn’t allow to edit the source
>>> LaTEX file. It would be an awesome feature and could make Lyx a great rival
>>> against the other LaTEX editors.
>>> I like the simplicity of Lyx and the features it provides, but sometimes
>>> I would like to change or add code directly to the source file.
>>>
>>> Can you please answer this question? Or at least redirect me to a site
>>> where I can find it?
>>>
>> This is an often requested feature. See for example:
>> http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/FeaturePoll2#toc10
>> http://www.lyx.org/trac/ticket/5260
>>
>> The basic answer, from what I understand, is simply that it is *very*
>> hard to parse LaTeX. LyX has its own format. It can export that format
>> to LaTeX very reliably, but it is extremely difficult to make that a
>> seamless two-way communication.
>>
>
> Yes, the basic problem is that this is highly non-trivial, though not
> impossible, and it isn't
> really compatible with the idea behind LyX. Contrary to how it is often
> advertised, LyX is
> NOT a LaTeX frontend. LaTeX is only one of the formats we natively export
> (though by far
> the most important).
>
> The ability to edit the LaTeX would basically involve offering the user
> the LaTeX source
> for some fragment of text, then running tex2lyx on whatever the user ended
> up with, then
> replacing the relevant fragment of text witih the result. This is still
> harder than it sounds,
> since tex2lyx outputs some text (a LyX file, basically), and what we
> really need is the data
> structure that LyX would create upon reading that file. This could be
> done, though, by reading
> the new text into a temporary Buffer and doing some kind of cut and paste
> behind the scenes.
> But there's not really any guarantee that what LyX would export at that
> point would actually
> be the same as what the user entered: That kind of 'roundtrip' is a goal,
> not a reality.
>
> Alternatively, the LaTeX the user created could become ERT. But then maybe
> such a user
> should just use LaTeX.
>
> Richard
>
>