[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: file extensions
From: |
Rune Zedeler |
Subject: |
Re: file extensions |
Date: |
Sun, 14 Sep 2003 23:30:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030312 |
Graham Percival wrote:
The problem is that, AFAIK, there is no difference in the file format
between include-files and non-include files. (apart from the lack
of a \score{} section in include files)
I don't see why that is a "problem".
You could argue the same with .c and .h files or with .ps and .eps files.
It would be nice to be able to do something like "lilypond *.ly" without
getting errors about include-files.
You can already do this with files names:
Yeah, but that only works with your own files because we have no naming
/conventions/.
I think it would be much cleaner to specify the file status with the
file extension.
-Rune
Re: file extensions, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2003/09/15