Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:
>> To me, a Grand Input Syntax "fixing" of LilyPond, would amount to
>> creating a syntax that strictly separates parsing and interpretation.
>> This implies not only rethinking  a lot of syntax, but also it means
>> letting go of some of the flexibility and conciseness of the current
>> format.
>
> This sound like a Right Thing to do, but i'm not knowledgeable enough
> to know what the results would actually be.  Examples appreciated
> (hopefully some examples will show in other discussions).

Well, one simple consequence would be that one can't define music
functions in a document (their definition is interpretation, their use
is parsing).  The use of Scheme would be quite constrained, as reading
it is parsing, evaluating it interpretation.

-- 
David Kastrup