I’d say it still have a long way to go, especially for advanced use cases

If you just want to have a quick pdf generator, it’s definitely the right tool.

One thing that’s way better is the scripting. In LaTeX it’s just an afterthought, simply exposing its convoluted core. In Typst, it feels way more like a first class feature.

I’d say it still have a long way to go, especially for advanced use cases […]

What do you think it’s still lacking?

Maths feels like a first class citizen in latex. The syntax is ugly, but there is some logic through the legacy jank.

Typst makes fundamental design decisions that render it unsuitable beyond extremely simply equations. In LaTeX, curly braces are nearly always reserved for enclosing arguments, to avoid confusion with actual brackets.

Typst uses normal brackets for both its scripting and actual maths.

For example, \frac{n(n+1)}{2} in latex turns into (n(n + 1)) / 2 in typst. The typst code is incredibly unclear - the first set of brackets with the slash together actually form the fraction operator, so neither end up visible.

You can see how this would start to struggle even with high school level maths, with bracketed terms and possibly fractional terms in exponents, integrals, etc.

For example, it is very difficult for me to work out the difference between the following three in typst. That is specifically not what you want from a typesetting language.

LaTeX ignores whitespace, so you can just use a formatter to space out your code and ensure the curly braces. This is not even an option in typst, which uses the space as an escape character.