Hi, from what i see there are two concurrent proposals about introducing digits in variable names: http://codereview.appspot.com/6778055/ by David http://codereview.appspot.com/6493072/ by Keith
i'm a bit confused - i'm not sure wheter these patches are mutually exclusive or not. Anyway, here's my general opinion (it's more about the UI than actual code): - having to enclose identifiers in quotation marks feels more natural to me than using some special sign between letters and digits (i.e. i like \"violin1" better than \violin+1 (or \violin.1)), - "parser simplicity" is most important to me. In other words, i vote for a solution that fits smoothly with other syntax constructs, introduces as few exceptions as possible, doesn't produce surprising/confusing results, etc. Of course it would be great if On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 7:05 AM, <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > [...] \violin1, \violin 1, \violin $(1+1) [would] all work, [...] however, my impression from previous discussions was that doing so would mean creating exceptions in the parser, ambiguous syntax and making some other interesting stuff impossible. So, i'm a bit lost... Janek
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
