General reply to Messrs Rogers, Peekay and Kastrup!
In the end I googled lilypond and found the \char approach
myself. Right now, I'm settling for it, because as DK
hints, both TextPad and jEdit will save UTF-8 just fine,
but the next time you open the file, you see mysterious
blobs, not the intended character. That's why I committed
"mangling" on my previous project!
But I intend to re-visit some German songs I lily'ed a few
years ago, and obviously \char won't really hack it - I
like the suggestion of Emacs, and will go looking for it.
Tx & rgds, GFStC.
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:25:48 +0200
David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
David Rogers <davidandrewrog...@gmail.com> writes:
In very general terms, it shouldn't be right to be
"mangling"
encodings by hand in *any* kind of project. It should be
possible to
find an encoding that does the job correctly the first
time. That's
what computers are for...
It is actually rather hard for an editor to preserve a
byte stream when
it interprets the characters at the same time (search
and replace can't
be hit and miss). Some encodings (escape-based codings)
can't do that
reasonably at all. utf-8 is still quite hard
(basically, you have to
convert anything not in the proper uniquely-encoded
utf-8 set into
quoted bytes, and use something not in the proper utf-8
set for
representing quoted bytes).
So there are very few editors around that won't mangle
files just by
loading and saving with a wrong idea of its encoding.
Emacs is one of
the few editors that manages quite well, while the
developers of its
offspring XEmacs (which has different character
handling, having been
forked while both only supported 8-bit encodings) so far
call this an
impossible task.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
