Re: String syntax, Was: substitution with \movement

[Mats Bengtsson]

Graham Percival wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 23:57:00 +0200
> Mats Bengtsson <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>  
>
> > Graham Percival wrote:
> >
> >    
> >
> > > Rewriting the parser for such a trivial thing would be a waste of
> > > resources.  Just get used to typing #, just like {} or ,' or any
> > > other piece of lilypond input.  The docs are supposed to use #""
> > > all the time, to reinforce this point.
> > >
> > >
> > >      
> > Do you really mean "all the time", i.e. even in situations like
> >
> > \new Voice = "one" { ... } 
> > ...
> > \new Lyrics \lyricsto "one" { ... }
> >    
>
> All the time that it's getting passed as a scheme value, for
> example
>  \set instrumentName = #"cello"
>
> Not for things like
>  \markup { this "is some quoted text" }
>  
Which brings us back to the original problem, namely the
inconsistency of the syntax. Even with my 11 years of
LilyPond experience, I have to think both once or twice
to figure out in what syntactical constructs a string is
a Scheme value and when it's not (I'm not even convinced
that it ever can be anything else than a Scheme value,
without checking in the source code). I know the issue
has been discussed before and I don't think it's a big
problem, but it's still an annoyance.

   /Mats

   /Mats