Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: >>> I think it would be good to polish this, so that this either works or >>> always produces syntax error. >> >> Figuring out heuristics when or when one should not issue a warning is >> not all that easy to decide with a reasonable amount of consistency, and >> this is not a problem particular to \undo. > > ok.
Not that this would not be useful. It's just that it's a lot of detail work and finetuning without providing any new functionality. To get a warning, you need to actually _run_ the source file, and in most cases that means that proofreading would equally well tell you what you want to know. So the return for the one-time investment in programming is rather small. I won't object if anybody wants to work on this, but at the current point of time I myself have stuff I consider more important. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
