Re: New read/eval Scheme syntax inconsistent in handling existing code

[Carl Sorensen]

On 11/21/11 1:35 PM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:
>I don't throw out functionality as a rule.  ly:export was an exception
>to that rule because its presence was fundamentally incompatible with
>maintaining predictable timing for #.  But I backed up this step with a
>set of convert-ly rules of rather high quality and coverage (including
>the entire Lilypond code base).
 
Let me take the time (much belated) to thank you for that set of
convert-ly rules.  I disagree that they are of rather high quality and
coverage; I believe they are of extremely high quality and coverage.

Thanks,

Carl