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?
3
-
6I 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.– CanageekJan 13, 2014 at 22:56
-
The title is perhaps a bit misleading in that respect.– YouJan 16, 2014 at 14:17
-
I have clarified the title.– IngoJan 17, 2014 at 8:52
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
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 meansi.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.
-
-
It seems to be implemented in Python and Perl, approximately half and half. That's a - for me: introducing another dependency. Jan 29, 2017 at 6:07