Re: file extensions

[Rune Zedeler]

Graham Percival wrote:

> The problem is that, AFAIK, there is no difference in the file format
> between include-files and non-include files.  (apart from the lack
> of a \score{} section in include files)

I don't see why that is a "problem".
You could argue the same with .c and .h files or with .ps and .eps files.


> > It would be nice to be able to do something like "lilypond *.ly" without
> > getting errors about include-files.
>
>
> You can already do this with files names:

Yeah, but that only works with your own files because we have no naming
/conventions/.
I think it would be much cleaner to specify the file status with the
file extension.


-Rune