lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Feedback wanted: syntax highlighting in the LilyPond documentation


From: Valentin Petzel
Subject: Re: Feedback wanted: syntax highlighting in the LilyPond documentation
Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2022 02:51:54 +0100

Hello Jean, hello David,

I do like the idea, but I do agree with David to some extent. Syntax 
highlighting should emphasize the structure of the file and thus make reading 
easier. But if it gets too colorful in terms of contrast of colors the colors 
simply distract you.

For example there is no good reason for coloring all numbers some outstanding 
way. Frescobaldi does this, but that just creates distracting dots of color in 
the code. And numbers tend to be quite discernible, so you do not really need 
a special color to mark them.

That being said your color scheme is much better than Frescobaldi’s scheme, 
which is appallingly distracting. See the appended file for a comparison of 
Frescobaldi and KDE Kate (which is by no means perfect, but at least an 
improvement...).

I think your color scheme could be improved easily by doing something like in 
the other screenshot (taking the same snippet as David).

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Sonntag, 2. Jänner 2022, 01:06:35 CET schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > There is an ongoing proposal to add syntax highlighting
> > in LilyPond's documentation. Since it is a notable change
> > to the documentation reading experience, user feedback would
> > be appreciated. You can browse a syntax-highlighted version
> > of the notation manual here:
> > 
> > http://abou-samra.fr/highlighting-demo/notation/index.html
> > 
> > For comparison, this is the current notation manual:
> > 
> > https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.23/Documentation/notation/index.html
> > 
> > The main questions are: what do you think of the principle?
> > And is the color scheme good enough?
> 
> I just followed the discussion without much attention because I did not
> think that it would affect me whether or not there was syntax
> highlighting.  That probably was a mistake.  Taking a random example:

Attachment: Comparisation.png
Description: PNG image

Attachment: Improvements.png
Description: PNG image

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


reply via email to

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