[OS X TeX] preview on TS
murrayeisenberg at gmail.com
Wed Jan 28 16:09:10 EST 2015
On 27 Jan 2015 18:30:32 -0700, Don Green Dragon <fergdc at Shaw.ca> wrote:
> On 22Jan2015, at 2:01 PM, Murray Eisenberg <murrayeisenberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 22 Jan 2015 11:34:36 -0700, Don Green Dragon <fergdc at Shaw.ca> wrote:
>>> On 30Dec2014, at 10:55 AM, Nitecki, Zbigniew H. <Zbigniew.Nitecki at tufts.edu> wrote:
>>>> For me, breaking into chunks (actually, sections of chapters) helps me organize my work. I don't use \include, just a master file with lots of \input commands.
>>> What?s the advantage of using \input as opposed to \include?
>> Actually, I think the advantage is to using \include: Then for a main document that includes many "subdocuments", e.g., chapters in a book, you can from the main .tex source with whatever you want in the preamble, use \includeonly to selectively process only what you're currently working on.
> The above description is the style that I?ve been using for a long time, but I see now how \input can be gainfully applied.
>> In fact, it's not hard to whip up a macro so that when you tex the main document, it prompts you to type in which of the subdocuments to include for the run!
> In view of the simplicity of modifying the list of `active? subdocuments, do you find the `macro? you allude to advantageous?
When I used a \typein command to provide the argument to \includeonly, it was when I was working on a book with 15+ chapters or other units, and it was often convenient to be able to check the preview of just a couple such units at a time.
That was quite a few years ago, but even then the Y&Y TeX system I was using was lickety-split, so it was seldom a question of cutting down the source so as to reduce computation time.
Murray Eisenberg murrayeisenberg at gmail.com
503 King Farm Blvd #101 Home (240)-246-7240
Rockville, MD 20850-6667 Mobile (413)-427-5334
More information about the MacOSX-TeX