[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: not all doc "clean-ups" are good

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: not all doc "clean-ups" are good
Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 15:16:17 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 07:32:20AM +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > Please read:
> >
> > in particular the point about #.
> I interpret as being used for inline samples and the like.

Ah, good point!  I glanced at the subject line and didn't notice
that you were only changing the "text" parts and not @lilypond

I withdraw this complaint.

> Please be more specific what I'm missing.  In particular, many
> locations which I've fixed (at least in my opinion) were talking
> about, say, `#t' and `#foo' at the same time, which I consider *very*
> confusing.  There are two possiblities to fix it: Either by saying
> `#t' and `foo', or by saying `##t' and `#foo'.

Hmm.  I still have no clue about the difference between #t and
#foo, which certainly emphasizes that there *is* confusion.

The decision to always prepend with a # for any lilypond input
which accepts it (even if not strictly necessary) was made in GDP,
but that only narrows it down to Sep 2007 - Aug 2008.  I think it
was in the first half, but that doesn't help much.  :(
I spent a few minutes looking through the email archives without
finding the discussion, sorry.

However, that discussion was specifically about @lilypond stuff,
not the text.  So I'm now ok with this change; thanks for
explaining it to me.

- Graham

reply via email to

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