Re: CONS specs update?

[Pierre THIERRY]

> Strictly speaking, Lilypond processes the input .ly file to produce
> either a .midi file or a .tex file.

OK, so it's completely separated from TeX, as far as Cons is concerned.

> (How would you handle Java, btw? One .java file can be compiled into
> multiple .class files depending on whether you have inner classes or
> private classes defined.)

I aware of that issue because it was discussed sooner on the list, but I
never worked with Java, so I don't know how this will be dealt with...

> Ideally, though, I'd prefer to treat them as separate steps. I don't
> like the idea of a file modified in-place

It seems to me that it's a common case in the way people develop their
own processors (I often do it with perl -i or Vim scripts, for example).
We should not force people to change their work to be able to use Cons
to build it, IMHO.

If using in-place processors has drawbacks (e.g. you loose the benefit
of some Cons abilities), we could strongly encourage users of doing
things antoher way, though.

> Now about result files... one reason I added Lilypond was to bring up
> the issue of how we should handle steps that produce multiple targets

Yeah, I alos thought about this with TeX, that produce sometimes five or
more targets (even if only one is very important for the user, the DVI).

> In such cases, the dependency graph is not a tree, but a directed
> (acyclic, hopefully) graph.

It's precisely why I used the term graph, where dependency tree is often
used.

Quickly,
Nowhere man
-- 
address@hidden
OpenPGP 0xD9D50D8A

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature