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 <[email protected]> | GNU LilyPond - The music typesetter
http://www.xs4all.nl/~jantien | http://www.lilypond.org
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
