Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[David Kastrup]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> writes:

> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>
>> I have become convinced that optional, unnamed arguments are not a
>> happy design decision, in any language. In Lily it's particularly
>> problematic, since we don't group function parameters.
>
> If we start doing this, that would solve the several of the issues
> raised.

What issues were raised?

> It would move a bit away from the `lets remove all red tape' path that
> we (I?) embarked on previously.
>
> There are two commonly used ways of grouping function parameters,
> instead of
>
>     \relative { a \parenthesize b c }
>
> we could have something* like
>
>     (relative { a (parenthesize b) c })
>     relative ({a parenthesize (b) c})
>
> I don't think there are easy ways to combine or drop ( and }, ie have
> something like
>
>    {relative a b c}
>    foo = relative
>    {foo a b c}
>
> Or the C-style equivalents.

Who do we think to be doing a favor with that?

-- 
David Kastrup