Werner's suggestion was to allow for both
\lilypond+c d e f+
and
\lilypond{c d e f}(of course, it can be done with a fairly simple regular expression including an 'or', however it grows fairly quickly with the number of pairing characters to support).
/Mats
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Are you saying that the trick used in \verb is bad or just that we should never mention the example below in any documentation or that we should use the \verb trick but handle pairing characters specially?
The last one. All editors will benefit.
Agreed! Unfortunately, the implementors will suffer. A direct implementation of the \verb trick is a one line change (see the attachment), whereas your suggestion is much harder to implement without major surgery to the current lilypond-book implementation.
Is it that difficult? I would say it is a matter of doing
\\lilypond({(?P<code>[^}]+)}|(?P<delim>.)(?P<code>.*)(?P=delim))
-- ============================================= Mats Bengtsson Signal Processing Signals, Sensors and Systems Royal Institute of Technology SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM Sweden Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463 Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe =============================================
_______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
