Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org> writes: > Am 17. April 2016 10:51:34 MESZ, schrieb David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org> writes: >> >>> Am 17. April 2016 08:20:52 MESZ, schrieb David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>> >>>>A warning is appropriate for something which is not an error: namely >>>>LilyPond has a well-specified task but the results will not likely >>>>make sense. LilyPond does not return an error code for a warning. >>> >>> Well, then let LilyPond report an error when it encounters one. But >>> only then a "fatal" one when it actually forces LilyPond to stop. >> >>For any _correct_ input, LilyPond is eventually forced to stop. > > This is the point where I have to say you are talking bullshit, > deliberately (?) and arbitrarily flipping around everyone's words and > intentions. It doesn't make sense to continue with that thread.
So what does "force to stop" mean in your opinion? That LilyPond should refrain from completing the current PDF it has open and make sure that it is invalid or deleted? What if the input file generated more than one PDF? Should it delete or invalidate the PDF files it has written previously? What if it had already written a PDF but fails during generation of a MIDI or vice versa? I don't get the obsession with "it is not an error if LilyPond does not immediately crash and leaves bad output or none at all". When is a stop forced? Is LilyPond allowed to produce an error message before crashing? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
