On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:28:00 +0200
"Valentin Villenave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/11 Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Tis its extensibility that make LilyPond more likely to be able to
> > fit the more users needs, and its extensibility is made possible
> > because LilyPond is programmable (by the users). How could you get
> > rid off a full featured language -- scheme -- from LilyPond input
> > files without reimplementing it, badly most certainly.
>
> If I understood correctly, he's not complaining about the Scheme
> integration itself but the way it is parsed.
Oh, come on! What is so hard about typing #? On an English
keyboard, you already need to be pressing the shift key to get the
" that you'll type for your string anyway.
Rewriting the parser for such a trivial thing would be a waste of
resources. Just get used to typing #, just like {} or ,' or any
other piece of lilypond input. The docs are supposed to use #""
all the time, to reinforce this point.
Cheers,
- Graham
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
