Creating a JuliaTeX group on github

question

#5

This sounds like a good idea for a group.

Another feature I would like to see someday is a LaTeX package that allows the execution of julia code from within a TeX document, kind of like the SageTeX package, perhaps the JuliaTeX group could organize somethingl like that.


#6

I think it should be a citations group. No need to limit ourselves just to BibTeX


#7

Sorry I am new to Julia and in some sense scientific computing in general. Can someone explain to me the purpose of this? Is it a Julia-based parser for bibtex entries? Why would that be useful in the context of Jabref?

I have a long term goal of working on nicely formatted Latex output for Julia, which I think is an important step in getting people to switch over from Stata. So I have some interest in JuliaTeX group.


#8

No need to do to the general before doing the specific.


#9

This problem has actually already been solved in some packages, like my Reduce.jl package, which can turn Julia code into LaTeX code and also display it as LaTeX in IJulia:

julia> using Reduce
julia> :(sin(x*im) + cos(y*φ)) |> latex |> print
\documentstyle{article}
\begin{document}

\begin{displaymath}
\cos \left(\left(\left(\sqrt {5}+1\right) y\right)/2\right)+\sinh \,x\: i
\end{displaymath}

\end{document}

also SymPy.jl can also convert to latex.

of course, making a plain Julia package that does this without any external programs would be nice too.


#10

I am very new to Julia, so I dont fully know the ecosystem. A bit of background, I am pre-PHD econ and work mostly in Stata. As much as I hate to say it, Stata does a lot of things well, and one of them is that every single function is compatible with variable labels, and there is a package that allows more flexibility with making latex tables. I think a good way to motivate myself to learn more Julia is to try and write something that will make highly custom latex tables and maybe figure out a way to use variable labels to make publication quality output easily.

Plus Julia already has a following in economics because of the Fed’s DSGE models, and the matrix syntax is way more intuitive than Python.


#11

It should be very possible and feasible to do something like this using the Julia language (since Julia has excellent built-in functions for String manipulation, etc) and it would be a good exercise to get started with creating Julia packages. So I’d like to encourage you to go ahead.

Is this going to be a general package for generating LaTeX code from Julia objects, or is it specific to Tables?


#12

Probably just tables. I’m most interested in regression output, and I think TikZ is too much work to deal with.


#13

Sorry for being silent for a while. From this conversation, I am even more convince that a JuliaTeX group would be useful to visibility and organization.

I will ask the owner of the current packages I know of related to the LaTeX environment. The list below might not be exhaustive, so please feel free to add others.

If enough of the authors agree, we can create the JuliaTeX group in a couple of days.


#14

Why do you say PGFPlotsX.jl is unregistered?


Package succesfully registered but not present in https://pkg.julialang.org/
#15

I couldn’t find it in the list of registered packages. That seems to be dated from the 2017-10-01 (maybe that’s the reason).
But indeed, after testing I can install it with the Pkg.add() command, my bad. I’m editing my post asap.


#16

Ah, that’s interesting. It has been registered for quite a while so it is strange it doesn’t show up in that list.


Outdated list of registered packages
#17

I don’t think the list has been updated in a while, my packages were updated to 0.6 but on the list they are only tested for 0.5 for example.


#18

Hmmm, so 2017-10-01 would be January 10th instead of 1st October?

We should probably ask for an update then. At least a monthly update would be nice …


#19

Not sure what’s going on, it says mine was updated a day ago, but it’s only for 0.5, don’t see any 0.6


#20

I suppose I will open a new post to signal this weird situation with the list of registered packages.

@stevengj, @bramtayl, I just published on GitHub a set of 3 packages to handle bibliography. Outside of BibTeX, it is currently just a backbone structure for a general bibliography group of packages. I detail this in [Citations in docs], but basically, there is a package for an internal bibliography type, a set of packages (currently only bibtex) to parse bibliography languages, and one package to wrap all of that and manage import and export of citations.
Now, I would be happy if I can merge those with the bibtex related packages mentioned above :slight_smile: (I tried to make my packages structure with modularity to ease the process)


#21

I don’t know why you wouldn’t just make a PR?


#22

Another interesting possibility would be a Julia plugin for TeXmacs
http://www.texmacs.org.
For example, TeXmacs already has plugins for R, Python, Maxima, Reduce, Fricas, Sage. Also, TeXmacs exports immediately to LaTeX.


#23

Simply because I finished my BibTeX parser before knowing that your parser existed (I would have used yours if I knew …). As the structures of both are different (and some functionalities) it won’t be straightforward to merge them.
Also, I think taking into account functionalities, speed of (pre)compilation and execution and easiness to maintain is important.

I will prepare a test case for speed evaluation at some point next week and let you know the results. Is that OK?


#24

I’m actually glad someone is taking this on. I started out looking at it just for fun, but realized quickly that I’m not too invested in bibliography management. Hence why it remains unpublished. As far as the part I wrote, BibTeX.jl is rather slow and not fully featured. However, I think it would be not to reuse code that’s already written. The parts that stevengj wrote I think are very useful, and not just for BibTeX, but LaTex more generally.