On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 07:04:11PM +0000, jan.nieuwenhui...@gmail.com wrote: > I do think that it's important that the suggestion that > Emacs would not indent GNU code correctly has been withdrawn.
I agree; I'm not quite certain where that suggestion arose, but tomorrow I will check the GOP-PROP and make sure it does not appear there. > On the one hand, it is silly in a monty-pythonesque way to > depend on and run Emacs to indent code where astyle would do. > On the other hand, it is equally silly to suggest that astyle > would be required to indent GNU code after editing with Emacs. But we're not talking about GNU code. We're talking about lilypond code, and lilypond code has never been formatted exactly the way that emacs does -- otherwise fixcc.py wouldn't exist! I don't think it's silly to suggest that we have a small, editor-netural program to indent code. A few years ago, we started using a moderately small, little-used source control system (i.e. git). A year or two ago, we started using a very small, little-used script (git-cl) to begin code reviews. We use texi2html for the html docs. etc. I really don't see what's wrong with astyle. I agree that it is important that we do not slander programs/projects/people, so as I said I will check the GOP-PROP to make sure it does not imply that emacs cannot format GNU code. But in terms of which program we use to format lilypond code, I see no compelling reason to use 40-meg emacs instead of 150-kay astyle. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
