Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-18 Thread Hans Hagen

On 18-3-2011 3:54, mathew wrote:

On Mar 14, 2011, at 16:49, Marco wrote:

I totally agree. But Cecil mentioned in another thread: »My document is mostly
text.« Even if a few mp graphics are involved luatex is still noticeably
slower.


I look at it from the perspective that the last time I used TeX, my 8MHz Atari 
ST took several seconds to process each page. And then it took several seconds 
per page for the previewer to show me the DVI. And I couldn't do anything else 
on the machine while it was working.

My way of working now is that I keep a short scratchpad document in TeXworks, 
and use it to sort out my formatting and macros, taking advantage of the live 
preview. When I'm done, I copy the definitions into my actual working document, 
which I edit in vim. I only typeset the entire working document once or twice 
an hour, if that; vim catches syntax errors. So if LuaTex takes a few seconds 
longer to do the typesetting, it's completely unimportant.


it's no problem to get a 250 pages per second throughput in mkiv but as 
soon as you add more interesting things to a page work needs to be done 
and that takes runtime


on the average i get some 10-15 pages per second for documents of normal 
complexity on my (by now) 5 year old laptop that i use for development 
which is quite ok (mk.pdf: 10 pps, hybrid.pdf: 11 pps, cld-mkiv: 15 pps)


Hans


-
  Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
  Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
 | www.pragma-pod.nl
-
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-17 Thread mathew
On Mar 14, 2011, at 16:49, Marco wrote:
 I totally agree. But Cecil mentioned in another thread: »My document is mostly
 text.« Even if a few mp graphics are involved luatex is still noticeably
 slower.

I look at it from the perspective that the last time I used TeX, my 8MHz Atari 
ST took several seconds to process each page. And then it took several seconds 
per page for the previewer to show me the DVI. And I couldn't do anything else 
on the machine while it was working.

My way of working now is that I keep a short scratchpad document in TeXworks, 
and use it to sort out my formatting and macros, taking advantage of the live 
preview. When I'm done, I copy the definitions into my actual working document, 
which I edit in vim. I only typeset the entire working document once or twice 
an hour, if that; vim catches syntax errors. So if LuaTex takes a few seconds 
longer to do the typesetting, it's completely unimportant.


mathew
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


[NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Cecil Westerhof
When installing minimals you have MKII, XeTeX and MKIV. I understand that
you should normally use MKIV, but when are the other two used?

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Marco
On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhof cldwester...@gmail.com wrote:

 When installing minimals you have MKII, XeTeX and MKIV. I understand that
 you should normally use MKIV, but when are the other two used?

MKII can be used either with pdftex or xetex (as you wish, compare
advantages/disadvantages). MKIV can only be used with luatex.

You have to differ between ConTeXt »versions« (mkii, mkiv) and TeX backends
(pdftex, xetex, luatex).


Marco


___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Cecil Westerhof
2011/3/14 Marco net...@lavabit.com

 On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhof cldwester...@gmail.com wrote:

  When installing minimals you have MKII, XeTeX and MKIV. I understand that
  you should normally use MKIV, but when are the other two used?

 MKII can be used either with pdftex or xetex (as you wish, compare
 advantages/disadvantages). MKIV can only be used with luatex.

 You have to differ between ConTeXt »versions« (mkii, mkiv) and TeX backends
 (pdftex, xetex, luatex).


And where do I find the advantages/disadvantages? Or can I just always use
MKIV?

-- 
Cecil Westerhof
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Marco
On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhof cldwester...@gmail.com wrote:

 2011/3/14 Marco net...@lavabit.com
 
  On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhof cldwester...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   When installing minimals you have MKII, XeTeX and MKIV. I understand
   that you should normally use MKIV, but when are the other two used?
 
  MKII can be used either with pdftex or xetex (as you wish, compare
  advantages/disadvantages). MKIV can only be used with luatex.
 
  You have to differ between ConTeXt »versions« (mkii, mkiv) and TeX
  backends (pdftex, xetex, luatex).
 
 
 And where do I find the advantages/disadvantages?

Wikipedia, google, information source of your slightest distrust.
Short and incomplete:

pdftex:
+ protrusion, font expansion
- fonts are a nightmare

xetex:
+ system fonts are easily accessible
- no protrusion, no font expansion

luatex:
+ protrusion, font expansion, easy access of system fonts, scripting language
  included, fast with mplib
- in general much slower


 Or can I just always use MKIV?

Yes, you can.


Marco


___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Hans Hagen

On 14-3-2011 7:26, Cecil Westerhof wrote:

2011/3/14 Marconet...@lavabit.com


On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhofcldwester...@gmail.com  wrote:


When installing minimals you have MKII, XeTeX and MKIV. I understand that
you should normally use MKIV, but when are the other two used?


MKII can be used either with pdftex or xetex (as you wish, compare
advantages/disadvantages). MKIV can only be used with luatex.

You have to differ between ConTeXt »versions« (mkii, mkiv) and TeX backends
(pdftex, xetex, luatex).



And where do I find the advantages/disadvantages? Or can I just always use
MKIV?


As already mentioned speed depends on the kind of document. In general 
context runs slower with xetex and luatex if only because these are 
unicode engines while pdftex is 8 bit.


Occasionally i do speed tests and it also depends on the operating 
system, file caching etc. For luatex the size of the cpu cache also 
matters. Although pdftex/mkiv is always faster unless on eused metapoist 
in which case mkiv is a clear winner (the metafun manual runs in tens of 
seconds in mkiv but takes many minutes in mkii.  Comparing xetex/mkii 
and luatex/mkiv is difficult as xetex also pipes its output to a dvi 
backend. On some tests mkiv is faster, on some others mkii but I must 
admit that i only tested simple document.


On a raw simple document, pdftex can be twice as fast as xetex or 
luatex. The more lua driven features are used, the slower mkiv becomes 
but in general it does a better job then.


Anyhow .. only luatex/mkiv will evolve so best stick to that.

Hans

-
  Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
  Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
 | www.pragma-pod.nl
-
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Mojca Miklavec
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 19:44, Marco wrote:
 On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhof wrote:
 2011/3/14 Marco wrote:
  On 2011-03-14 Cecil Westerhof wrote:
 
   When installing minimals you have MKII, XeTeX and MKIV. I understand
   that you should normally use MKIV, but when are the other two used?

They are mostly relicts of the past which still happen to be
supported. (But if ConTeXt was written from scratch, there would
probably be no support for them.)


I often write mathematical-oriented papers that need zero tweaking
with OpenType fonts, complex layouts or that could benefit from lua
scripting. I compile those randomly with MKII and MKIV, if nothing
else to check for differences, or if there is a problem in MKIV, I can
always use MKII is a fallback. MKII hardly ever changes, so it is
slightly more reliable in some cases, but it is very limited in
comparison to MKIV.

I use XeTeX mostly when I need OpenType fonts and something in MKIV
breaks. XeTeX has some advantages in out-of-the-box support for exotic
scripts (which I don't use), but many of its features are not
supported in ConTeXt at the high-level user interface. In general,
XeTeX is the least supported engine in ConTeXt community. In contrary,
for LaTeX users XeTeX is becoming the mainstream engine to use (best
supported by active developers).

  MKII can be used either with pdftex or xetex (as you wish, compare
  advantages/disadvantages). MKIV can only be used with luatex.
 
  You have to differ between ConTeXt »versions« (mkii, mkiv) and TeX
  backends (pdftex, xetex, luatex).
 

 And where do I find the advantages/disadvantages?

 Wikipedia, google, information source of your slightest distrust.
 Short and incomplete:

 pdftex:
 + protrusion, font expansion
 - fonts are a nightmare
(you should have put three minuses there :)
+ stability

 xetex:
 + system fonts are easily accessible
 - no protrusion, no font expansion

I never tried to use them, but I thought that Han The Thanh [please
add the accents] added that to XeTeX semi-recently
(http://scripts.sil.org/svn-view/xetex/TRUNK/, the last comment 8
months ago: merged microtype branch to trunk).

 luatex:
 + protrusion, font expansion, easy access of system fonts, scripting language
  included, fast with mplib
 - in general much slower

... depending on whether in general includes metapost or not. A
speed factor of ten (faster) is nothing unusual for luatex when many
metapost graphics come into play.

++ better support

 Or can I just always use MKIV?

 Yes, you can.

Definitely. You don't need to bother, just stick to MKIV as long as it
works fine for you.

Mojca
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___


Re: [NTG-context] Difference between MKII, XeTeX and MKIV

2011-03-14 Thread Marco
On 2011-03-14 Mojca Miklavec mojca.miklavec.li...@gmail.com wrote:

  xetex:
  + system fonts are easily accessible
  - no protrusion, no font expansion
 
 I never tried to use them, but I thought that Han The Thanh [please
 add the accents] added that to XeTeX semi-recently
 (http://scripts.sil.org/svn-view/xetex/TRUNK/, the last comment 8
 months ago: merged microtype branch to trunk).

I don't follow xetex development any more, so my information was outdated.
Thanks for the correction.

  luatex:
  + protrusion, font expansion, easy access of system fonts, scripting
  language included, fast with mplib
  - in general much slower
 
 ... depending on whether in general includes metapost or not. A
 speed factor of ten (faster) is nothing unusual for luatex when many
 metapost graphics come into play.

I totally agree. But Cecil mentioned in another thread: »My document is mostly
text.« Even if a few mp graphics are involved luatex is still noticeably
slower.


Marco


___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___