I wrote my PhD Thesis in Typst
93 comments
·June 22, 2025dleslie
the-wumpus
I disagree. The web app editor is closed source, but much of what it provides is open source so editing is a similar (and imo better) experience locally. The typst compiler and LSP and everything you need to use it is open source.
Imo the situation is more like if overleaf were also the people who made the LaTeX project originally.
I think the only possible issue with the typst org dying (assuming after the full 1.0 version so it's mostly maintenance) is that packages are automatically downloaded from the typst site, but an open repo can trivially be made considering that the set of packages used is just from a open source git repo and the closed source site just hosts tar.gz files of the folders in the repo. Not a big deal I think.
dleslie
They have a deep incentive to drive users to subscribe, and that's directly at odds with keeping all of the document rendering open source. It makes a lot of sense for them to provide document features that are only available to subscribers.
the-wumpus
They have some incentive to drive users to subscribe, but they have other forms of income, and I think if they ever implemented even a single feature of actual rendering that was closed source their community would riot and we'd get a community managed fork (probably by the guy who does the language server...).
The only way they can continue to gain traction is if they never ever in any way lock people to the web app. Documents must be portable, it's part of why someone would want typst anyways.
I do not see a future where this happens, and if it does it will be because the typst org has changed hands and is also no longer particularly relevant to the future of typst the language.
agnishom
> implementing critical features in the closed source portion
Like which critical features, for example?
dleslie
For now, that's the entire collaboration component. It would make sense to build a portion of document rendering in that context which won't be found in the open source portions. A value-add to convince users to subscribe.
moelf
>For now, that's the entire collaboration component.
And LaTeX has this for free? It's separated concerns, I think the analogy is Overleaf and LaTeX but just happened to be made by the same group of folks, it doesn't have to go down the monetization-at-the-cost-of-your-user route.
shermantanktop
Why do CS doctoral candidates have such a fascination with typesetting? I mean, be into whatever you’re into, I guess.
But as soon as someone starts talking about LaTEX and how they spent months on their macros, I think “another hapless victim has fallen into LaTEX’s trap.” It’s like an ant lion that feeds on procrastinating students.
cycomanic
From watching people write their thesis in both latex and word, I'd say if anything it is the other way around. The people who write their thesis in word (or another wysiwyg editor) spend more time on their layout than the people writing in latex. Worse, they spend the time while writing, while latex allows for separation of tasks, which allows people to get into the flow much more easily.
Sure, theoretically you can only concentrate on writing with word and ignore layout. In practice in takes a lot of discipline so instead you see people moving figures around putting spaces or returns to move a heading where they want to etc.. In particular as a way to procrastinate from actual writing.
RheingoldRiver
I was a math major in undergrad, we care about typesetting so much because you really do not want to be stuck handwriting everything, but it's not easy to be faster typing than you are with handwriting when you're writing out rows and rows of equations. (Actually physics was generally a lot harder for me to keep up with while typing than math was.)
And when your life is revolving around classes or your thesis, the #1 most important thing to you in the world is how easily you can transfer your ideas to paper/digital format. It makes a lot of sense that people care a lot about the quality of their typesetting engine and exchange macro tips with each other (I got a lot of helpful advice from friends, and my default latex header was about 50% my own stuff and 50% copied from friends in my same major)
vkazanov
I don't know about now but in 2000s anything even remotely math-related was PURE PAIN in Word-likes.
In my master's there were like 30 pages of formulas, all interdependent. Typing/retyping these would take forever.
Also, something as simple as having per-chapter files or working with an acceptable editor also helps.
wenc
It's because LaTeX gives us a sense of legitimacy. (it's also why people go overboard with math notation in LaTeX documents, even when prose is more appropriate).
It produces documents that look like those produced by professors, and luminaries in the field. If you write equations in Word Equation Editor, your work just doesn't look very serious.
It's the same joy I felt when I laser-printed my first newsletter designed in Aldus PageMaker. I was only in my teens but I felt like a "professional".
pdpi
> If you write equations in Word Equation Editor, your work just doesn't look very serious.
Haven't tried it in a while, but, last I checked, Word Equation Editor output didn't look serious because it looked janky and look like it wasn't really done in a "professional" tool. Part of that is a self-fulfilling prophecy of course, LaTeX output looks right in part because it's what people have been reading for decades, but TeX's formulas just look plain good.
fluidcruft
I don't know if this is still the case or not but equations in Word can be upgraded to MathType. IIRC the Word equations were a basic version of MathType (i.e. developed by the same people). MathType included latex syntax and much better layout and formatting. It was the only way to stay sane when working on journal articles with collaborators who gave less than zero interest in latex (i.e. physicians).
Jap2-0
Yet Word is leagues ahead of Google docs... (shudders)
agnishom
> If you write equations in Word Equation Editor
The experience is also awful. It's much better to write \in or \frac{}{} rather than to go to a dropdown menu and figure out which button to click.
Waterluvian
I did this once in undergrad. Used Word to make my term paper two columns and all formatted like a journal article. Felt cool. Felt legitimate. But I then felt kinda embarrassed and never really shared it with anyone.
TimorousBestie
Most universities don’t formally train their STEM students in technical writing. At the graduate level, one is basically at the mercy of one’s advisor’s taste, for better or (usually) for worse.
bsoles
The first thing that my PhD advisor did, when I first met him as a foreign student, was to give me this book: https://archive.org/details/technicalwriting0000huck. And I am forever grateful for it.
shermantanktop
Having tutored CS undergrads on writing, the lack of training (or care, or perceived relevance) was painfully obvious. Many were semi-literate wrt to English prose.
bjourne
That may be true in US universities, but in Europe students have to write technical reports in almost every course.
senkora
There’s always the WordTex template if you want to create documents that look like LaTeX output from within Word: https://youtu.be/jlX_pThh7z8
B1FF_PSUVM
> If you write equations in Word Equation Editor, your work just doesn't look very serious.
Sez you. MS Word 4.0 for Mac was perfectly alright, putting in less elbow grease than fiddling with LaTex.
And you could get a PDF out of it, via the PostScript print driver.
Never liked those spindly CM Tex fonts, anyway.
api
Given that LLMs can or soon will be able to turn markdown or word into LaTeX this filter won’t last long.
It’s a dumb filter anyway.
roshdodd
A small, but important aspect of typesetting/WYSIWYM is the ability to break down a large document (like a thesis) into discrete sub-components. You could work on each section of your document in an individual .tex file and include it later in your top-level .tex file. This setup works well with VCS like git.
Another ergonomic benefit is scripting. For example, if I'm running a series of scripts to generate figures/plots, LaTeX will pick up on the new files (if the filename is unmodified) and update those figures after recompiling. This is preferable to scrolling through a large document in MS Word and attempting to update each figure individually.
As the size and figure count of your document increases, the ergonomics in MS Word degrade. The initial setup effort in LaTeX becomes minimal as this cost is "amortized" over the document.
gwervc
> The initial setup effort in LaTeX becomes minimal as this cost is "amortized" over the document.
I'm still sour about the 3 days it took me to have something usable for my thesis, and I was starting from an existing template. And it's still not exactly how I want it to be; I gave up on addressing a bug in the reference list.
aeroevan
My school just had an official cls file, so my initial setup was just to download the template. So if that's where you're coming from (the journals I submitted to also had official templates), it's really minimal setup.
thomasfedb
I wrote my joint med-CS honours (1 year research thing we have in Aus) thesis in Word. My med supervisor was happy with it. CS supervised insisted I reformat it in LaTeX as he couldn't stand the typesetting.
Honestly I don't disagree with him, it looked far better in 'TeX. But that's probably a learnt preference.
In essence, it's culture.
porcoda
Not all of us fell into that trap! My dissertation was written almost entirely using a default document class and a handful of packages, and only towards the end did I apply the university document style to come into compliance. I had more than enough to do on the subject of the PhD and didn’t have the patience to burn time on typesetting or fiddling with macros.
I’ve found in the decades since then that my most productive co-authors have been the ones who don’t think about typesetting and just use the basics. The ones who obsess over things like tikz or fancy macros for things like source layout and such: they get annoying fast.
generationP
Tikz is misplaced in this list; it is how you make any kind of vector drawings in LaTeX. It's not the only way, but perhaps the best documented and most expressive one. If you have any such drawings in your work, you won't get around putting some effort into it. Not comparable with boxed theorems or fancy headings.
nextos
LaTeX typesetting is a solved problem. Memoir or Classic Thesis, paired with microtype, provide outstanding results and you need to spend zero time on tweaking stuff.
Typst is interesting, but it doesn't yet support all microtypography features provided by microtype. IMHO, those make a big difference.
catgary
I’m going to have to disagree with you there. The compile times are long, the error messages are worse than useless, and tikz diagrams are almost always unreadable messes.
Large swathes of mathematics, computer science, and physics involve notations and diagrams that are genuinely hard to typeset, and incredibly repetitive and hard to read if you don’t make heavy use of the macro system. Integrating some actual programming features could be a game changer.
nextos
> Integrating some actual programming features could be a game changer.
LuaTeX already lets you embed Lua code and it is really good.
However, I do agree some usability improvements are needed.
__float
What in microtype makes "a big difference"? I don't recall using it (my LaTeX years are long behind me), but all of the examples on https://www.khirevich.com/latex/microtype/ seem incredibly minor. I don't think I'd notice any of them as the reader.
nextos
It will tweak spacing, kerning, margin protrusion, and font size to improve readability avoid big word gaps and excessive end-of-line hyphenation.
It is what sets professional typography apart. Only Adobe InDesign provides a comparable implementation, tweaking all those details.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hz-program for a better explanation and an example.
IMHO, the difference is obvious and not minor. Without microtypography texts look ugly: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Hz_Progr...
gumbojuice
I'm sticking with LaTeX, not as a fetish, but because journal/conferences still do not accept e.g. typst. Will they ever do? I don't know, depends on their willingness to integrate it into their toolchains I guess?
WhyNotHugo
Typst looks really promising, especially due to the fact that it had common templates (like the IEEE one) which produce content identical to LaTeX.
My biggest gripe with latex is the tooling. During my last paper, I ended up using a makefile which would usually work. When it didn’t work, running it twice would fix the issue. In the rarest cases, I had to run `git clean -xdf` and the next run would work.
I still have no idea what was going on, and most makefiles out there seem to be obscenely complex and simply parse the output and run the same commands again if a certain set of errors occurred.
shusaku
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing twice and expecting different results.
By coincidence, this is the basic way to compile latex.
tom_
My makefiles ran it 4 times, i think. I still preferred it to Word.
Evidlo
Just use Tectonic nowadays for compiling LaTeX source. It automatically handles these cases of compiling multiple times.
pcfwik
Absolutely not a perfect solution, and maybe you're already using it within your Makefiles, but for anyone who doesn't yet know about it there's Latexmk[1] which is supposed to automate all of this hassle. I think at least on Debian it's included with texlive-full. In addition it has some nice flags like `-outdir` which lets you send all the crazy LaTeX intermediate build/aux files to a separate directory that's easy to gitignore.
nextos
LaTeX needs several passes to compile because it was designed with minicomputers of the 80s in mind, i.e. tiny memory constraints.
Latexmk is one way to address this problem. A good IDE like AUCTeX can also figure out how many times the compiler should be invoked.
Good IDEs will also provide other invaluable assistance, like SyncTeX (jumping from source to exact point at PDF, and back).
jeffparsons
I think I used to understand this, but it's been a long time since I had to write any serious LaTeX, so I don't anymore. I found this snippet in my personal _quick-build-latex_ script from over a decade ago:
if [ -z "$(find . -name "*.bib" -print0)" ]; then
# Just two runs, to cover TOC building, etc.
pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode "$SOURCE_FILE" && \
pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode "$SOURCE_FILE"
else
pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode "$SOURCE_FILE" && \
bibtex "$SOURCE_FILE" && \
pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode "$SOURCE_FILE" && \
pdflatex -interaction=nonstopmode "$SOURCE_FILE"
fi
So I guess if you're using bibtex, then you need to run it three times, but otherwise only twice?This is to say... I'm glad those days are gone.
TimorousBestie
I’m gradually moving my work over to Typst and it’s been a breath of fresh air. Compiles very quickly.
Perhaps the hardest part has been relearning the syntax for math notation; Typst has some interesting opinions in this space.
nomel
mitex is an option [1]. There's no way I could learn another notation, at this point.
wenc
Typst looks good, but I'm actually going back to LaTeX but paired with Claude Code in VS Code.
I took a hiatus from LaTeX (got my PhD more than a decade ago). I used to know TikZ commands by heart, and I used to write sophisticated preambles (lots of \newcommand). I still remember LaTeX math notation (it's in my muscle memory, and it's used everywhere including in Markdown), but I'd forgotten all the other stuff.
Claude Code, amazingly, knows all that other stuff. I just tell it what I want and it gets 95% of the way there in 1-2 shots.
Not only that, it can figure out the error messages. The biggest pain in the neck with LaTeX is figuring out what went wrong. With Claude, that's not such a big issue.
TimorousBestie
Claude and the like are a huge problem for new languages that want to do new things. It was bad enough when a LaTeX replacement had to compete with forty-ish years of package development time. Now they also have to compete with the millions of lines of existing code LLMs have hoovered up.
coliveira
Which is good, because we don't want to deal with inferior solutions to typesetting that pop up every few years.
smaudet
Great for code re-use but I agree, terrible for anything new.
KnuthIsGod
Typist will probably be dead or acquihired in a few years.
Latex will be around for decades.
commandersaki
In case anyone hasn't seen some typst source and renders, here's a few documents I whipped up:
First is based on Todd C. Miller's Latex Resume Template:
- https://typst.app/project/rDUHMUg5vxl4jQ5q2grGPY
Second is a Enduring Power of Attorney:
- https://typst.app/project/rs9ZgGLhgM7iPvFs7PQv5O
Third a will:
agnishom
Congratulations to the author.
I have to agree that Typst source generally looks a lot less uglier than LaTeX. I considered writing stuff in Typst many times, but I couldn't master the courage to do so.
vessenes
I was on the typst train, particularly because its layout engine has some additional vertical control for long documents that latex lacks. However, just about when I was looking at moving over, LLM coding became good or at least good enough, and one area the current crop is bad at is doing layout in anything but latex. Not that they are good at latex, but they are terrible, terrible, terrible at typst. Really bad. Maybe in another year or six months!
the-wumpus
I understand why people like using LLMs for coding, saves them having to think, but it is deeply frustrating to see it being such a crutch that some people cannot use new tools without it.
I suppose the issue is not new, many people didn't want to use new lanuages before because they couldn't copy snippets from the internet, but it was frustrating then too.
dkga
Well, they are good in markdown and rust. Perhaps feeding some Typst documentation overview into the prompt could solve it?
freehorse
What deters me from Typst is that latex math syntax is nowadays ubiquitous. You write $x^2=1$ and it renders in many places. Learning a new syntax for math expressions is simply not in my interests.
the-wumpus
To be fair $x^2=1$ literally works in typst.
pityJuke
Glad to hear Typst has people doing serious work with it.
I’ve been able to avoid LaTeX. At uni, I went for org-mode -> LaTeX, which was OK except when my .emacs file was filling up with LaTeX stuff to make random stuff work. To be honest, that means I probably can’t even compile it again if I wanted to.
Typst has been awesome (always ran into LaTeX just being horribly inconsistent when layout stuff) when I’ve used it. Hope it continues.
shrinks99
Very cool! I ran into the multiple bibliography issue when attempting to typeset my grandmother's PHD thesis which I was able to rescue from the 5.25" floppies it was originally stored on. I was planning on waiting until they solved this officially to resume that side project, but might give Alexandria a shot!
In thirty years LaTEX will still be open source and probably will be maintained.
Typst appears to be a mix of open source and closed source; the general model here tends to be neglecting the open source part and implementing critical features in the closed source portion. Which is to say, it's unlikely to live beyond the company itself.