Gilles Sadowski wrote Saturday, January 23, 2010 11:39 PM
>>> Gilles asked for an attachment I don't exactly know what to
>>> attach so
>>> I've attached the latest pdf output.
>>
>> What was wanted was the exact working code to get bad output,
>> which you've
>> included in the body of the email. Perfect!
>
> IMHO, perfect would be to *attach* a complete lilypond file, so
> that people
> trying to help don't have to copy/paste/fill the missing
> bits/fiddle with
> long streaks of blank spaces, etc; but just save and compile.
Well, IMO, it's better to have a short file in the body of the
email.
Because that way I can look at it and identify errors without
having to save
an attachment and then open it up in another application.
I don't *have* to save to attachment to just view it. I said that
it's
easier (if the purpose is to compile it) to just save it than to
cut/copy
the relevant bits from the body of the mail.
I much prefer attachments too, as long as they are of
complete .ly files. With 2 clicks the attachment opens
up in my favourite editor with LilyPond highlighting
applied. It's then easier to spot mistakes and make
any corrections. A single press on PF9 will compile it.
If the code is inline, long lines have very often been
wrapped, so I have to manually open my editor, cut and
paste the code, and fix any wrapped lines before I can
properly view or compile it.
I'm much more likely to investigate a problem with an
attached file for these reasons.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
