23

I stumbled upon AutoLaTeX today and it seems to be very similar to LaTeXMk indeed. Can you summarise the main differences, which might help me choose between the two tools?

  • 6
    I don't think this is a duplicate as it is asking for a compare/contrast, while the linked question is just a big list which currently has few if any details and very specifically does not answer this question. – Canageek Jan 13 '14 at 22:56
  • The title is perhaps a bit misleading in that respect. – You Jan 16 '14 at 14:17
  • I have clarified the title. – Ingo Jan 17 '14 at 8:52
8
+100

The easiest answer is to follow the table in the autolatex site. According with that table, Autolatex:

  • Is more recent (2014 vs 2012, and in active development, as it can be seen in its git repository)
  • Is implemented in python (vs Perl). This is a + for me :-)
  • Supports more tex engines (as xelatex, lualatex)
  • Can automatically convert some file types to include them in latex documents (images, and some programming languages, to be included as listings, I guess)
  • Can export to Elsevier, whatever this means i.e: conform to the document and folder structure in which Elsevier expects the submissions for automatic compilation.
  • Has support for some editors, in form of "plugin".

Since I don't really have any experience with this tool (which I just discovered too), I can't go any deeper in the comparison, so I don't deserve nor want the bounty, but I didn't want to leave the question without answer either.

  • Export to Elsevier is explained below the table. – Manuel Jul 2 '14 at 19:40
  • It seems to be implemented in Python and Perl, approximately half and half. That's a - for me: introducing another dependency. – Franklin Yu Jan 29 '17 at 6:07

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.