[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Quotes around \consists argument?
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: Quotes around \consists argument? |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Apr 2022 14:01:29 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Luca Fascione <l.fascione@gmail.com> writes:
> I think this is because it being an unquoted string (PERLfolk call these
> barewords) makes it feel more like an identifier, even if technically it's
> a string (for the time being).
> It also has some advantages for example it's easier to work with names
> being always unquoted when you're grepping for them, kinda scenario
>
> I think things that work like language-level names, for this reason, should
> flow unquoted, even if this requires effectively supporting barewords.
LilyPond's input syntax treats strings and unquoted words identical in
most circumstances: essentially you can use quote marks to have things
interpreted as a single word that would otherwise be split into several
syntactic entities or be considered a notename (for example).
--
David Kastrup
- Quotes around \consists argument?, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/04/24
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, David Kastrup, 2022/04/24
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, Werner LEMBERG, 2022/04/24
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, David Kastrup, 2022/04/24
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/04/24
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, David Kastrup, 2022/04/25
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, Luca Fascione, 2022/04/25
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, Luca Fascione, 2022/04/25
- Re: Quotes around \consists argument?, Luca Fascione, 2022/04/25