Aaron Hill <lilyp...@hillvisions.com> writes: > On 2021-09-25 5:11 am, David Kastrup wrote: >> Aaron Hill <lilyp...@hillvisions.com> writes: >> >>> On 2021-09-25 12:46 am, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote: >>>> Aaron: >>>> >>>>> If the asterisk feels overloaded, you could use the multiplication >>>>> sign: >>>>> %%%% >>>>> \version "2.22.0" >>>>> × = % U+00D7 >>>> I'd advise against introducing non-ASCII commands. Users won't be >>>> happy if they can't find on their keyboards what the documentation >>>> instructs them to type. >>> I guess my sarcasm indicator got lost in shipment. What one should >>> have taken away from my post was that \x was the viable alternative to >>> \*, not the multiplication sign (which is ASCII, by the by; just not >>> commonly found on keyboard layouts). >> ASCII is a 7-bit encoding; U+00D7 is certainly not within its range. > > *was*. ASCII has been 8-bit for quite some time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASCII > Still, be pedantic and miss the forest for the trees, my point was > that \x is a good option if \* was going to be problematic. Sure, but the problem with \× is exactly that × is not part of ASCII and thus does not uniformly work on extended ASCII encodings (of which the non-8-bit UTF-8 encoding that LilyPond uses for representing code points in the Latin-1 specific subrange of Unicode is only one). -- David Kastrup
