Op zondag 05-04-2009 om 18:13 uur [tijdzone -0300], schreef Han-Wen Nienhuys:
> as long as I have anything to do with LilyPond, I will veto changes > like this that introduce inconsistent whitespace handling in the > syntax. What was the problem with this again? It is not so much inconsistent whitepace, it's the absence or presence of whitespace. That's quite a difference. We have that already c 4 4 == c4 4 != c44 % first ws significance BAD, second GOOD? ^ ^ I'm quite certain there is a good argument for not not making such changes--in fact I remember proposing this change about a decade ago and you talking me out of it :-) --but I don't remember the reason. It would be good for the archives too: a good reason may even hold it back should the veto ever fail ;-) Jan. -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user