| Re: [frogs] Should _all_ lilypond functions be listed in music-functions-init.ly? |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lilynet.net/frogs Archives
]
- To: frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [frogs] Should _all_ lilypond functions be listed in music-functions-init.ly?
- From: Graham Percival <graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 12:45:18 +0800
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:date:from:to:subject :message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=kGDfc7/JgE+Hd5uCFZr9mWkZZlx3MLZybahfyqWocUA=; b=LFr2rLk73/xBVuihFucQMF3Du2kAP6JakiMBYm3E1U4hKQrgGF8jqEiKyjhqesGN51 mXYVkf2QiZkxON1Lloyuruz3aXYUHYKP+3n7Ig1pjtuRfbwdqbShEqsyIk4br3T72YuW 86nZ8EcGVv7U6MkIuAQ67lGVIX40+zdofNvZ4=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=kjoYaCBhfYus9Ahseon3e/EWrAIE+wpZ9+vuBaRUmXrfBZyfNzNcKKso2yI1E4hx8W +PQOONKl+fS0Yw//0IAglYaK+M+gplBCBRHCVTuomnsjqQs7eJ6VAloFLAih2yFgIQGD YkMtzuhFpdOp9bcPcSw0zerYHQwhN2jM29jR0=
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 11:57:48PM +0000, Ian Hulin wrote:
> If we're producing a list in an appendix of the documentation of the
> syntax for bits of Lilypond, if the user's trying to look up how to
> code it in a source file for a piece, is he/she going to care about the
> distinction between an identifier and core language component.
I don't think you're doing that. I certainly *hope* that you're
not doing that. My understanding is that this was a relatively
simple job to get you familiar with the source code and
contributing to git, and then you'll move on to working on bugs.
That's not to say that the docs are perfect, but documentation is
a separate job from bugfixing.
Cheers,
- Graham
---
----
Join the Frogs!