On 5/29/15 1:25 PM, "Simon Albrecht" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hello, > >a while ago I found this document on what appear to be very widely >accepted standards for formatting scheme code: ><http://community.schemewiki.org/?scheme-style>. I find it very useful >and it seems to be altogether uncontroversial while warranting good >legibility. >Do we also accept these guidelines in our use of scheme? Yes, we accept these guidelines. But outside of .scm files, we don't enforce them. Last time I checked, our official standard of Scheme style was "whatever Emacs creates". We have a script that gets close in creating approved style, but it never got officially adopted. >If yes, we >should consider documenting them, or rather, referencing them in our >docs. This could be > in the usage manual ><http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/usage/general-suggestions>, >where the corresponding Lilypond coding recommendations are found. I would be happy with a reference there. > in the scheme tutorial ><http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/extending/scheme-tutorial>, >but where? Someone who is completely new to scheme will not make much >use of style instructions. It seems like a reference in the Scheme tutorial would also be appropriate. (Perhaps a reference to the usage manual, rather than a restatement of whatever is in Usage. > the Learning Manual would be best for propagating their use, but that >doesn¹t actually introduce scheme, does it? (thinking aloudŠ) I don't think we need to propagate their use in .ly files. I also think we should *not* introduce Scheme in the Learning Manual. Lilypond is hard enough without the scheme layer. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
