I wrote my PhD Thesis in Typst (fransskarman.com)

Article summary

The author wrote their PhD thesis using Typst, a modern typesetting language, instead of LaTeX. They found Typst to be faster and more comfortable to use, with a more consistent and well-designed language. However, they encountered some issues with bibliography management and debugging. The author concludes that Typst is a good choice for those who are willing to tweak and learn, but may not be suitable for everyone, especially those who want a system that works out of the box.

Main themes

• Typst vs LaTeX
• Typesetting languages
• Academic writing
• Document formatting
• Build environments
• Debugging and error messages
• Flexibility and customization
• Maturity and suitability for large documents

What commenters say

• Some commenters agree that LaTeX is outdated and cumbersome, while others defend its use due to its high-quality output and established workflows.
• The need for multiple compilation passes in LaTeX is seen as a major drawback by some, while others argue that it is a necessary trade-off for proper typesetting.
• There are differing opinions on the suitability of Typst for large documents, with some seeing it as a viable alternative to LaTeX and others as not yet mature enough.
• The use of build environments and makefiles is viewed as unnecessary complexity by some, while others see it as a necessary tool for managing complex documents.
• Some argue that LaTeX's flexibility is both a strength and a weakness, allowing for customization but also leading to complexity and inconsistency.
• The importance of good error messages and debugging tools is highlighted by many commenters, with some seeing Typst as an improvement over LaTeX in this regard.