As a linguist who uses trees for my work all the time, I'm very familiar with all of the tree drawing packages useful for linguistics. One thing I've noticed of late is that almost any tree question that comes up, a couple of users (you know who you are...) jump in with a blanket recommendation that the
forest package should be used, even though the original question did not ask about
Now if someone is using the default
tikz method for drawing a tree, by all means suggest using a tool better suited to the task.
I'm a big fan of
forest, and I'm also in favour of recommending better solutions to a problem if they exist, but for many plain linguistics tree problems in particular, the widely used and excellent package
tikz-qtree does a fine job (and in some cases, IMO) a better job than
forest. To see what I mean, look at this example:
forest trees are from a linguistic perspective much harder to read IMO, and the packing algorithm of
forest is responsible. Furthermore, the default edge path in
forest is not one used much in linguistics, and so needs to be changed to match common practice in the field.
So please, people, let's recommend
forest in places where it clearly has an advantage, but don't just tell people using
tikz-qtree that they should be using
forest instead, especially if their original question uses
This problem has arisen before in the context of TikZ vs. PSTricks etc. answers: