Interesting - I would never use it as I find entering math with plain ASCII much faster and more intuitive, but if there is interest in this, I'll increase its priority!
Interesting - I would never use it as I find entering math with plain ASCII much faster and more intuitive, but if there is interest in this, I'll increase its priority!
I did go back and play with it to confirm I felt as strongly as I do. I used a combination of my inputs and the notebooks available here to see how much it mattered (https://www.wolfram-media.com/products/introduction-to-calcu...)
ASCII entry is great if you already know exactly what you're doing. There's no built-in tooling to help you convert your intent to ASCII. You have to be confident that your entry accurately represents what you intended, since the input isn't typeset in the output either. And you have to be comfortable doing the translation in your head as you go back and forth across your work, fast enough that it doesn't get in the way of reading your own notebook.
A lot of what makes Mathematica notebooks valuable is that they're readable. I can't read a Woxi Studio notebook, I can only re-parse it. It seems that mathematical expressions included in text don't render in Woxi Studio either so it isn't possible to read notebooks that include math content. The ASCII position is completely reasonable for Woxi as a language; it just falls short of what Mathematica notebooks do for me.
I'm really impressed with everything else. Functions, plotting, solves — the tool works, is really fast and I'm super impressed. I might reach for your browser playground going forward. This is the type of software that makes me glad open source exists.
Maybe through https://texmacs.org? It supports handing over beautifully typeset and semantically-structured math to various CAS