[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Maybe version should be mandatory
From: |
Erik Sandberg |
Subject: |
Re: Maybe version should be mandatory |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Dec 2004 18:51:13 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.6.2 |
On Friday 17 December 2004 17.19, David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
> On Friday 17 December 2004 09:34 am, Michael Kallas wrote:
> > Would it maybe make sense to make \version
> > numbers in the .ly files mandatory?
> > Or at least have some --Wall / --strict feature
> > that fails if it is not set?
> > That way, you would't forget to insert the version
> > and have to learn the hard way after years
> > that it would have been good to do so for compiling
> > with a different version.
>
> That's really a very good idea. Lilypond could fail
> if there were no \version and warn if the version
> were incorrect in some way. daveA
I'd like it the other way around. If \version is missing, a warning could be
adequate. You may sometimes want to be able to do small quick test files
containing just a couple of notes, like {c'8 d e f}. In these files you don't
want to bother adding a \version statement. If the version is incorrect, then
I think the current behaviour is good (i.e. abort if the version number is
outside a given range).
Erik
- Maybe version should be mandatory, Michael Kallas, 2004/12/17
- Re: Maybe version should be mandatory, David Raleigh Arnold, 2004/12/17
- Re: Maybe version should be mandatory,
Erik Sandberg <=
- Re: Maybe version should be mandatory, Jan Nieuwenhuizen, 2004/12/18
- Re: Maybe version should be mandatory, Michael Kallas, 2004/12/20
- betweensystemspace, David Raleigh Arnold, 2004/12/20
- Re: betweensystemspace, Mats Bengtsson, 2004/12/21
- Re: betweensystemspace, Karl Hammar, 2004/12/23
- Re: betweensystemspace, David Raleigh Arnold, 2004/12/23
- Re: betweensystemspace, Karl Hammar, 2004/12/28
- Re: betweensystemspace, David Raleigh Arnold, 2004/12/28