[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Syntax change proposal:
From: |
Trevor Daniels |
Subject: |
Re: Syntax change proposal: |
Date: |
Thu, 19 Jul 2012 22:02:06 +0100 |
David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 6:53 PM
> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup wrote Thursday, July 19, 2012 5:18 PM
>>
>>> \relative c' { b = 4. }
>>>
>>> (quick: can you guess what this does?).
>>
>> :) Well, I guessed correctly the 4. would be interpreted as a duration
>> in note mode, but I didn't know whether the = would muck it up.
>
> So what makes it legitimate? That's the interesting question...
octave_check:
/**/ { $$ = SCM_EOL; }
| '=' { $$ = scm_from_int (0); }
| '=' sub_quotes { $$ = scm_from_int (-$2); }
| '=' sup_quotes { $$ = scm_from_int ($2); }
;
I should have spotted this, but I've never used octave checks.
I suppose others might ... :(
Trevor
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, (continued)
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Graham Percival, 2012/07/15
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/16
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Trevor Daniels, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Trevor Daniels, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Trevor Daniels, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:,
Trevor Daniels <=
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Benkő Pál, 2012/07/19
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Keith OHara, 2012/07/25
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/25
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Keith OHara, 2012/07/25
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/25
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/25
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Keith OHara, 2012/07/25
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/26
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, Keith OHara, 2012/07/26
- Re: Syntax change proposal:, David Kastrup, 2012/07/26