[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Rationale for LaTeX lilypond-book syntax?

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Rationale for LaTeX lilypond-book syntax?
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 17:34:44 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.92 (gnu/linux)


the "LaTeX" syntax for lilypond-book happens to be something like

  \relative c' { c << { d e } { b c } >> <c es g> }

Unfortunately, this is quite annoying since actual optional arguments
for environments come _after_ the environment name in LaTeX, like

  \relative c' { c << { d e } { b c } >> <c es g> }

This is not academic: the current syntax prohibits making a TeX
implementation of lilypond-book (where TeX could write out the lilypond
environments and macros itself and run lilypond at the end of the TeX
run).  It also confuses the heck out of LaTeX-savvy editors which fail
to recognize the current syntax, making indentation and other supporting
functionality fail.

Would it be feasible to obsolete the first syntax and support (and
recommend) the second syntax?

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]