News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Math on GitHub: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by patrick451 on Saturday May 21, 2022 @12:32PM (#31459301)
> The reason why I’m so excited about this feature is that, in combination with version control and the issues/discussions capabilities in GitHub, I can see tectonic changes in how we’re publishing science. At last, science can really reap the benefits of a connected internet by moving away from static PDFs to living, breathing repositories which render like PDFs and provide a central place where one can actually talk about the article. – And fix bugs!

I'm skeptical of this take. Gitlab has had math rendering support for quite a while now, so this is hardly novel and doesn't seem to have resulted in the utopia the author is hoping for.

Re:Math on GitHub: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by Beldin on Saturday May 21, 2022 @12:36PM (#31459341)
I had the same feeling for a different reason: I don't think this reduces friction enough compared to sharing LaTeX files (on github or overleaf), which we can already do. So I don't think this will usher in a new era.

I realise this could very well become the next "dropbox comment" - and I'll be happy to be proven wrong.

Re:Math on GitHub: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by patrick451 on Saturday May 21, 2022 @12:56PM (#31459548)
It would be cool if they would just render entire latex manuscripts that are part of the repo. It sort of sucks that you need to duplicate what you wrote a paper submission into markdown to get github to render it.
Re:Math on GitHub: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by disgruntledphd2 on Sunday May 22, 2022 @09:46AM (#31468133)
They do this for org mode files, but that's a much simpler format than LaTeX.
Re:Math on GitHub: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly by nschloe on Sunday May 22, 2022 @07:28AM (#31466992)
Author here.

You're right, the big dreams always turn out smaller in real life when they come true, right? I'm hoping that the popularity of GitHub will aid a shift of publication style though. :)