Am 07.12.2012 00:24, schrieb Trevor Daniels: > > Joram Berger wrote Thursday, December 06, 2012 10:56 PM > >> Am 06.12.2012 23:51, schrieb Trevor Daniels: >>> >>> Noeck wrote >>> >>>> It still seems to me like there might be a possiblity to simplify the >>>> ly-syntax. Let me make a little comparison: >>>> >>>> I do not know the parser, but wouldn't it be possible to recognize >>>> whether a named context already exists and use that one and if not >>>> create a new one. >>> >>> Have a look. You can see the LilyPond grammar in Appendix C >>> of the Notation Reference. >>> >>> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/lilypond-grammar >>> >>> Trevor >>> >> >> I stumbled upon that graph several times, but I never understood what it >> should tell me, not even a little part of it (besides that the numbers >> are probably line numbers). > > It's the LilyPond grammar as extracted from the input to Bison (somewhat > simplified). Bison generates the parser which then implements this grammar. > > You need to understand this grammar in order to see whether any suggested > changes to the LilyPond language syntax can work sensibly. > > Trevor
Ok, that I know, but what do the symbols mean? Is that any standardized syntax language? From your mail I guess it is called Bison and I googled a bit and will have a look at this: www.gnu.org/software/bison/manual It would be nice to have some description or a link to GNU Bison on this page: http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/lilypond-grammar Because without any reference, I doubt that anyone not knowing Bison can understand it. Thanks for the hint, Joram _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
