Re: Add lilypond version predicates/operators (issue 317270043 by address@hidden)

[git]

https://codereview.appspot.com/317270043/diff/40001/scm/lily-library.scm
File scm/lily-library.scm (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/317270043/diff/40001/scm/lily-library.scm#newcode895
scm/lily-library.scm:895: "Lexicographically compare to lists @var{a}
and @var{b} using
On 2017/02/18 15:36:22, pwm wrote:
> I like David's suggestion for a more general function name, something
like
> "lexicographic-list-compare?", "list-compare?",
"lexicographic-compare?", or
> someting similar?

My reasoning for this name was to capture the specific *behaviour*
with regard to missing trailing elements, which is typical for
hierarchical versioning schemes. Any kind of generic -compare? name
seems to me to hide that.

But I'm still open to suggestions.


> Typo: compare to lists -> compare two lists

I've fixed this but won't create a patch set *for this*

https://codereview.appspot.com/317270043/diff/40001/scm/lily-library.scm#newcode911
scm/lily-library.scm:911: sequence or a list of numbers with up to three
elements."
On 2017/02/18 15:36:22, pwm wrote:
> To me it would be simpler and clearer to only accept a list for the
version.
> That also makes it easy to use a variable:
> (ly:version? > '(2 18 2))
> (ly:version? > my-version)

> I can't think of advantages to also accepting the other form (aside
from saving
> a few keystrokes).  Am I missing something?
> (ly:version? > 2 18 2)

I had originally used list arguments only, but David seemed to be
insisting (at least through his repeated code suggestions) to
use the "open" form.

I'd be more than willing to restrict this to one form only, but from
my POV this should be the list version (as you suggest, Paul)

https://codereview.appspot.com/317270043/