[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> > I've been thinking about a distinction between simple and compound
> > expressions for assignments. The simple ones need ;, the compound
> > ones don't.
>
> Hmmm. What is a simple expression? Right now, translator assignments
> are "simple", which doesn't fit my intuition. (They require a
"I've been thinking" means "I haven't implemented it yet"
> Semicolons are needed precisely in the following locations:
> after "simple" assignments
> after keywords that require them
>
> What is the gain of requiring semicolons after simple assignments?
I could experiment with leaving them out. The trouble is that the ;
act as separators, and without ; the lnaguage might become ambiguous.
> Note that convert-mudela doesn't add the semicolons that are now needed
> with mudela 1.0.6. For example, I always used to write
> \paper{linewidth=-1.0}
I am surprised that this works (this used to be impossible)
> Well, of course I tried it before asking the above. And there is no
> obvious effect. But there may be hidden effects of some sort.
>
> If possible, it might be nice for a warning to appear if someone does
> \translator with no name and without assigning it to an identifier.
> In other words, forgetting the name seems to be a mistake that leads
> to the wrong behavior with no warning.
OK.
> I just discovered the \> \< and \! commands. I'm a bit puzzled,
> though. Is \! just the same as \spandynamic{1 2} which is the same as
> \cr and \decr? Why does
>
> \notes{ a \< b \cr }
>
> work but
>
> \notes{ a \< b \! }
>
> give a parse error?
Umm. No clue.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** GNU LilyPond - The Music Typesetter
http://www.cs.uu.nl/people/hanwen/lilypond/index.html
