> > Using the syntax with quotes is rather ugly, I agree. But it is > > nonetheless potentially useful for two reasons: > > (1) it enables us to use numbers etc. in variable names
> Why would that be desirable? Suppose you make an edition of the St Matthew Passion, in which you have a few dozen parts (two orchestras and two choirs), and ~ 70-80 numbers (depending on how you count). Numbering everything using roman numerals would be a bit problematic, I'd say. > But really, \"violin1" is so much more ugly than \violinI or if you must > \violin_I. It's a probably a matter of taste, but I think \"68-choir/orchestra1/violino1" is much more readable and maintainable than \choirLXVIIIorchestraIviolinoI. Personally I use variables this way and find it much more natural than pretending we're back to classical Rome. And since Lilypond supports this already, I don't really get why this should be discouraged. Sharon Rosner -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Strings-as-variable-names-tp185113p185535.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
