Exploring Typst, a new typesetting system similar to LaTeX

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall reception & use cases

  • Many commenters find Typst significantly more pleasant than LaTeX for theses, books, resumes, research papers, invoices, slides, and auto‑generated PDFs (e.g., in SaaS, invoicing, legal/rules docs).
  • Several users say it has already replaced Markdown, LaTeX, and office tools for many personal or professional documents, while others keep LaTeX for journals that require it.
  • Some report full PhD theses and books done in Typst without external packages; others use it as a backend from Jupyter/Markdown via Pandoc or Quarto.

Ergonomics, language model, and math

  • Strong praise for Typst’s “modern scripting language” feel: pure functions, local scoping, set/show rules, easy custom functions, clear error messages.
  • Many say it’s far easier to extend than LaTeX’s macro system; complex LaTeX packages often become short Typst snippets.
  • Opinions split on math syntax: some miss LaTeX math and its ubiquity; others find Typst math more readable and pleasant.
  • Some debate over syntax “weirdness” and the blend of markup and code, but proponents frame it as a programming language, not just markup.

Comparison with LaTeX, Markdown, HTML

  • LaTeX is seen as powerful but archaic, slow, and fragile (package conflicts, global state, poor errors).
  • Markdown is deemed too limited for serious layout; Typst is positioned more as a LaTeX successor than a Markdown variant.
  • Several argue HTML should be the universal document format; others stress HTML/CSS’s weak print-quality typesetting and layout control vs PDF engines.

Ecosystem, tooling, and editors

  • Ecosystem is young: fewer packages, especially compared to LaTeX (e.g., TikZ, circuitikz, advanced diagrams). CeTZ exists but is seen as years behind TikZ.
  • VS Code/Tinymist integration gets strong praise (live preview, navigation, auto-complete); Emacs support exists but is not AUCTeX-level yet.
  • Some note Typst’s package system and pure functions reduce the risk of LaTeX-style package conflicts, though global‑style interactions can still be tricky.

Performance

  • Typst is repeatedly described as “blazingly fast” versus LaTeX; large books and indices compile in seconds instead of minutes.
  • Some mention Tectonic and KeenType as ways to speed LaTeX, but many still find Typst faster and lighter to install.

Limitations, missing features, and rough edges

  • Major blockers for some:
    • No PDF/EPS figure inclusion (PDF especially called a “show‑stopper” for scientific workflows).
    • No native HTML or EPUB output yet; both long “on the roadmap.”
    • Limited accessibility: PDFs convert poorly to EPUB (math/tables mangled), and lack of direct HTML is seen as a serious a11y gap.
  • Other pain points:
    • Line-spacing model (leading vs baseline) causes trouble for mandated formatting and multilingual baseline alignment; there’s open debate with core devs.
    • Floating content around columns and more advanced layouts remain hard.
    • Debugging is primitive (no print/logging; some use panic/repr as workarounds); devs say they want to design this carefully.
    • Some users get an “uncanny valley” feeling in math spacing; informal comparisons show small differences vs LaTeX, but opinions differ.

Academic adoption and compatibility

  • Key practical barrier: most journals/arXiv accept only LaTeX/Word. People either stay with LaTeX, or write in Typst then convert via Pandoc to LaTeX (not fully robust yet).
  • Lack of PDF figure support and specific package equivalents (tikz, circuitikz, advanced math/physics/chemistry) make Typst a non‑starter for some academic use cases.
  • Others accept a hybrid workflow (Typst for drafts/resumes, LaTeX for final submissions) and hope Typst or tooling will mature.

Accessibility, internationalization, and referencing

  • The absence of HTML output is repeatedly criticized as harmful for visually impaired users; some view PDF‑only workflows as inherently less accessible.
  • Typst’s automatic reference supplements (e.g., “Figure 4”) are convenient but clash with languages that require case and declension changes; users suggest number‑only defaults or better language‑aware behavior.
  • Multilingual typography (e.g., Serbian, Arabic) exposes edge cases where current defaults don’t generalize well.

Outlook and meta‑discussion

  • Enthusiasts see Typst as a “LaTeX done right”: modern language, fast, smaller mental burden, easier package writing.
  • Skeptics worry about fragmenting standards, missing ecosystem depth, and the risk of re‑creating LaTeX’s complexity over time.
  • Several argue that improving LaTeX engines (LuaTeX, etc.) might be preferable; others counter that TeX’s core design limits incremental fixes.
  • The CLI and language are fully open source; the paid web app is seen as a convenience layer, raising some mild concern but not blocking local use.