Just wanted to point out that this is not friendly for beginners. A beginner will be lost between a lot of "\frac"s and "{}"s (I don't know the name in English, sorry). Been there
The problem is that this is a really tiny subset of what you can write with LaTeX, even for high school students it won't be enough. I'd much rather use something like https://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php as a beginner.
I agree with your content, but not your tone. I'd like to add that one often hears "round brackets" as an unambiguous terms for the first category. And where's love for angle brackets <chevrons>?
Because the cultural ignorance you are showing is annoying. There are vastly more people speaking english in the world than there are US Americans. On top of that: Most of the Americans are speaking spanish and portuguese. America != US America for one.
That's what I was confused about. This is almost exactly LaTeX. The major difference is no "\". And it adds unneeded \left, \right, and just braces everywhere.
The biggest differences is in this example, I looked at all of them:
f'(x) = lim_{h -> 0} {f(x+h) - f(x)}/h
vs
f'(x) = \lim_{h\to 0}\frac{f(x+h) - f(x)}{h}
While the code it produces is way more than needed. See [1] for the crap it produces.
The key differences here are "\", "->" instead of "\to" (which \to makes more sense to me), and "/" instead of "\frac{}{}" (which I'll give to Mathify). But because LaTeX supports a lot more there is no question which one is actually easier.
I mainly made it for stuff like division where you have to type in \frac{}{} every time. So instead of typing \frac{x}{3} you can just type x/3 and get the same result.
This works for a lot of stuff. If you are only giving one input it'll work. So things like "\sin x", "x^2" \frac12" work. Interestingly you need a space in the sin example but not in the others. But "x^12" is the same as "x^{1} 2". So be careful with the shortcut.
I remember being surprised when I first saw \frac12, and I was like "that works?". The response I got was "of course". In retrospect, I admit that's the right answer: once you get TeX well enough, it's obvious.
For Mac users, you can also use the built-in 'Grapher' application which comes with a decent GUI for writing equations/formulas.
1) Open up the 'Grapher' application from the 'Applications/Utilities' folder.
2) Click on 'Choose' (it doesn't matter what other options you pick from the initial loading screen).
3) From here on, just type your equation into the main input field. You can also use the equation palette from the dropdown menu on the right side of the main input field to access the templates for things like integrals and summations. From the dropdown, you should be able to click on 'Show Equation Palette' to get a window of all of the math symbols Grapher supports.
4) Once done writing your equation, select it all, right click, and then click on 'Copy LaTeX Expression'.
Feedback for the author: this site is currently best viewed at 80% zoom and a browser width of 320 pixels. Originally (at 15.6", full hd screen) I have to keep jumping from center to left with nothing in between, which feels kinda weird on my eyes.
For desktop-based equation writing, something like Microsoft's equation editor is perfect. For tablet/touch screen, a pen based OCR might work really well?
Bookmarked as my new fastest way to generate a small LaTeX graphic when I need one — though actually having the ability to input LaTeX might be useful as well for edge cases.
The biggest lack compared to my normal Latex usage is a `\mathrm` command or similar. For example I believe the chemical elements should be set in upright, not italic.
It was puzzling that it showed "LaTeX: [empty small box]". I was waiting for something to load in that box before I realized that it would be replaced by the transormed output from whatever I typed above.
I don't know much about web design but for stuff like this I usually see the text box filled with an example input and the resulting output is displayed along with it.
delta produces \Delta instead of \delta, so there is no way to get \delta.
Is there a way to produce <= and >=? lt and gt become < and >, which is not so necessary seeing that < and > work fine, but lte and gte do not become \lte or \gte.
In the product prod example, there is nlogn in the source and logi in the rendering.
