Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[David Kastrup]

Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> What issues were raised?
>
> Janek and Graham raised the `what is a music function / let's make
> everything postfix' issue.

That's rather vague as an issue description.  Sort of the "What is a
preposition / let's make everything a case" issue converting modern
English into Protoindoeuropean.  The answer "try learning your grammar
before replacing it by something even more complex" is sort of
inevitable.

> Han-Wen raised the issue of [nameless] optional arguments.
>
>>> 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?
>
> Well, that's the question.  This is also a good chance to, ahum,
> once and for all decide on leaving things as they are.

I repeat myself: as long as "as they are" is not obeying a documented
and coherent definition, that's rather pointless as well.

The conservative approach is rather moving towards a consistent state
from the current starting point in the least damaging manner.

-- 
David Kastrup