Re: New alist to replace special characters. (issue4553056)

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/23/11 3:32 PM, "address@hidden"
<address@hidden> wrote:

> http://codereview.appspot.com/4553056/diff/1/lily/text-interface.cc#newcode40
> lily/text-interface.cc:40: int max_length = scm_to_int
> (ly_chain_assoc_get (ly_symbol2scm ("replacement-string-max-length"),
> It is needed line 50.
> This can be inferred from "replacement-alist".
> But with this property we can disable every shorthand or just those
> longer than replacement-string-max-length.

The ideas of disabling shorthands by the length of the replacement string
seems very hackish to me.  It seems unlikely to me that I would ever decide
which replacement strings to disable by the length.

To disable all replacement strings, we should have something like the
following functionality

#(define default-string-replacement-alist '(;  This would be your list
                            ))


to enable replacements:

\override TextScript #'replacement-alist =
#'default-string-replacement-alist

to disable replacements:

\override TextScript #'replacement-alist = #'()_


> 
> @Carl :
> I agree for the .scm file.
> Why do you think it is going in the wrong direction ?

Because we are making up our own syntax for characters that are already
defined as UTF characters.  We should avoid making up syntax if at all
possible.

For the ligatures, I'm supportive; we don't have a text processor that will
automatically handle ligatures.

For the special characters like trademark, and super2, we should just have
them inserted into the file as UTF characters, IMO.

I don't think we should be trying to (for example) handle TeX input in
LilyPond strings.  I see that as a maintenance pain in the neck.

We're moving in the direction (if we're not there already) of correctly
handling UTF text.  Why not just let the person who wants to use UTF text do
so?  What is the advantage to typing \\aa instead of å?

Thanks,

Carl