Re: LaTeX export: when is it more useful to use LuaTeX instead of pdfTeX?

[Max Nikulin]

On 09/07/2022 17:42, Juan Manuel Macías wrote:
> Max Nikulin writes:
>
> > [...] With LuaTeX you get more convenient OTF and TTF font selection, but
> > you you have to pay for the feature. It is necessary to explicitly
> > specify all families: normal, typewriter, italics, etc if you need
> > Unicode. -
>
> Not necessarily. You can go from the simplest or basic to the most
> complex, depending on the user's needs. If the user does not need to
> write in non-Latin scripts, and is not particularly interested in fonts
> and otf esoteric features, then the otf version of the Computer Modern
> font (which LuaTeX uses by default) will suffice, as this font has
> coverage for latin, latin-1, latin-extended, etc.

Juan Manuel, we are going to repeat the discussion happened a year ago. 
Has something changed since that time? LuaTeX uses Latin Modern and it 
is not nearly Unicode. PdfTeX out of the box has e.g. LH fonts - 
Cyrillic extension for Computer Modern, so it is enough to specify input 
and font encodings and it is not necessary to care concerning particular 
font.

> For example, if you want to write an article in both Russian (main
> language) and English, and want to use the Old Standard font (which has
> excellent coverage for Cyrillic), the basics might be:

My point is that it is not about what I want, it is related to what I 
have to do, namely choose, maybe install and explicitly configure some 
consistent set of fonts. With the following minimal example I got blank 
space instead of non-latin characters.

\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
Abc — Αλφάβητο — Азбука…
\end{document}

Just have tried with
    This is LuaTeX, Version 1.10.0 (TeX Live 2019/Debian)
It is from Ubuntu-20.04 system package.

So to switch default engine in Org from PdfLaTeX to LuaLaTeX it is 
necessary to write some code inspecting available font set suitable for 
specified language.