Trevor Daniels wrote:
Mark Polesky wrote Thursday, July 30, 2009 7:06 PM
It would be nice to have some central place that explains some
"internals" concepts. Here are examples of things that a new developer
might have to ask about, or perhaps spend a long time disentangling:
grob
prob
smob
output-def
callback
simple-closure
It would be nice to have a LilyPond-specific glossary, that users could
also use. For example, a user might get "glyph" and "stencil" confused.
I still get "command" "keyword" "identifier" and "variable" confused.
I still don't know the difference between "parser" and "lexer". You get
the idea.
Any thoughts?
It would be a helpful addition. The best place would
be another appendix to the NR. The only alternative
would be the CG, but this would not be helpful to users.
As it's a glossary, including terms which users don't
ever need would not a problem, I think. (The LM is too
simplistic for this, the MG is for musical terms and the
AU is not appropriate.)
Maybe Technical glossary would be a better term?
But we need to wait for more comments before taking any
action.
Trevor
+10
As these are all things for helping developers to get up to speed, I
think they fit best in the CG.
Cheers,
Ian
--- Begin Message ---
Trevor Daniels wrote:
Mark Polesky wrote Thursday, July 30, 2009 7:06 PM
It would be nice to have some central place that explains some
"internals" concepts. Here are examples of things that a new developer
might have to ask about, or perhaps spend a long time disentangling:
grob
prob
smob
output-def
callback
simple-closure
It would be nice to have a LilyPond-specific glossary, that users could
also use. For example, a user might get "glyph" and "stencil" confused.
I still get "command" "keyword" "identifier" and "variable" confused.
I still don't know the difference between "parser" and "lexer". You get
the idea.
Any thoughts?
It would be a helpful addition. The best place would
be another appendix to the NR. The only alternative
would be the CG, but this would not be helpful to users.
As it's a glossary, including terms which users don't
ever need would not a problem, I think. (The LM is too
simplistic for this, the MG is for musical terms and the
AU is not appropriate.)
Maybe Technical glossary would be a better term?
But we need to wait for more comments before taking any
action.
Trevor
+10
As these are all things for helping developers to get up to speed, I
think they fit best in the CG.
Cheers,
Ian
--- End Message ---
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
