On 2010/10/26 05:52:08, wl_gnu.org wrote:
Well, have a look at section A.17 (Scheme functions) and see how function names and arguments are formatted. Mark is referring to code blocks which contain metasyntactical variables. However, for your function (which is eventually appearing in A.17 too), this is not appropriate.
Well... Okay, yeah, but see this: http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/Documentation/contributor/syntax-survey.html#miscellany I'm the one that wrote the @var description there. And yes, the rationale is simplistic: "This improves readability in the PDF and HTML output." But I think Neil's impulse to format it that way matches the spirit of the rationale, no? And I certainly wouldn't be opposed to instituting the same policy for A.17, though of course that would be best left for a different patch than this one. Werner, if you have any objections to adding @code to all the @var's in A.17, I'd like to hear them. Thanks. - Mark http://codereview.appspot.com/2275042/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
