Le 18 août 09 à 12:16, John Mandereau a écrit :
Le lundi 17 août 2009 à 14:26 -0700, Graham Percival a écrit :
Besides, if somebody's setting a list, they already have to know
to remove the #' from the #'(1.0 -2.3) when putting it into
scheme.
(1.0 -2.3) is not a list
(1.0 -2.3) does not ev
Le lundi 17 août 2009 à 14:26 -0700, Graham Percival a écrit :
> Besides, if somebody's setting a list, they already have to know
> to remove the #' from the #'(1.0 -2.3) when putting it into
> scheme.
(1.0 -2.3) is not a list (it's a function call), but '(1.0 -2.3) and
(list 1.0 -2.3) are.
John
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:18:56PM +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> 2009/8/17 Graham Percival :
>
> > Alternately, we could be stricter about this -- I wouldn't mind if
> > we insisted that people use
> > \override foo #'bar = #5
> > instead of allowing the non-# form, if then we could state as a
> >
2009/8/17 Graham Percival :
> Alternately, we could be stricter about this -- I wouldn't mind if
> we insisted that people use
> \override foo #'bar = #5
> instead of allowing the non-# form, if then we could state as a
> general rule that overrides required a # after the =
That's fine for simpl
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 08:47:40PM +1000, Joe Neeman wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 00:59 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
> > Come on, you have to admit that this is terribly confusing! And as
> > far as I can tell, none of this is satisfactorily documented. I'm
> > trying to do something about it, but
On Mon, 2009-08-17 at 00:59 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
> Carl Sorensen wrote:
> > Because \[alphanum]+ is a STRING_IDENTIFIER.
>
> Not always:
>
> num = 1
> sym = #'symbol
>
> % error: syntax error, unexpected NUMBER_IDENTIFIER (\num)
> % \num
>
> % error: syntax error, unexpected SCM_IDENTIFIE
c: "lilypond-devel"
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2009 8:59 AM
Subject: Re: LilyPond strings and \markup
Carl Sorensen wrote:
Because \[alphanum]+ is a STRING_IDENTIFIER.
Not always:
num = 1
sym = #'symbol
% error: syntax error, unexpected NUMBER_IDENTIFIER (\num)
% \num
% err
Carl Sorensen wrote:
> Because \[alphanum]+ is a STRING_IDENTIFIER.
Not always:
num = 1
sym = #'symbol
% error: syntax error, unexpected NUMBER_IDENTIFIER (\num)
% \num
% error: syntax error, unexpected SCM_IDENTIFIER (\sym)
% \markup \sym
> Remember, these are *parser* error messages. They
On 8/16/09 5:30 PM, "Joe Neeman" wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 14:05 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
>> \version "2.13.4"
>>
>>
>> % QUESTION 1
>>
>> % "quoted string" is STRING
>> strA = "quoted string"
>>
>> % #"hash-quoted string" is SCM_TOKEN
>> strB = #"hash-quoted string"
>>
On Sun, 2009-08-16 at 14:05 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
> \version "2.13.4"
>
>
> % QUESTION 1
>
> % "quoted string" is STRING
> strA = "quoted string"
>
> % #"hash-quoted string" is SCM_TOKEN
> strB = #"hash-quoted string"
>
> % these are both 'unexpected STRING_IDENTIFIER's:
> % \
2009/8/16 Patrick McCarty :
> I suspect this is because LilyPond treats "foo" and #"foo" the same in
> this isolated context.
I think that's correct: all strings are stored as scheme objects since
it simplifies memory allocation (they don't have to be deleted at the
end of their life thanks to Gu
Hi Mark,
I'm not very familiar with LilyPond's parser/lexer, so I can't provide
any specifics. But here are some guesses.
On 2009-08-16, Mark Polesky wrote:
> \version "2.13.4"
>
>
> % QUESTION 1
>
> % "quoted string" is STRING
> strA = "quoted string"
>
> % #"hash-quoted string"
\version "2.13.4"
% QUESTION 1
% "quoted string" is STRING
strA = "quoted string"
% #"hash-quoted string" is SCM_TOKEN
strB = #"hash-quoted string"
% these are both 'unexpected STRING_IDENTIFIER's:
% \strA \strB
% Why isn't \strB an 'unexpected SCM_IDENTIFIER'?
% QU
13 matches
Mail list logo
