lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Syntax Error in compiling


From: Andrew Watson
Subject: Re: Syntax Error in compiling
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 22:21:33 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)

Gordon Gilbert <gord <at> angel.eicat.ca> writes:

> 
> Hi again!
> 
> Thanks to Andrew for showing me where the error was -- and SO SIMPLE!! 
> Can someone please explain how to read the error messages when lilypond 
> fails to compile a file?  For example, the bit the program quoted was 
> *after* the error -- is this standard?
> 
> Blessings,
> 
> Fr. Gordon Gilbert+
> 
>       +=====================================================+
>       |                 Angels' Roost Farm                  |
>       |       Rev. Fr. Gordon Gilbert & Susan Gilbert       |
>       |                   705-549-5056                      |
>       |                gord <at> angel.eicat.ca             |
>       |                susan <at> angel.eicat.ca            |
>       +=====================================================+
> 

Usually, if you can't find anything blatantly wrong in the program output, you
would suppose the error is somewhere further up. Sometimes it can be a *lot*
further, depending on what you're doing.
In this particular case, whatever is between two quotes is considered a string
(text). Since the closing quote is missing, the compiler is simply going to
continue through the file until it finds a matching quote (which obviously isn't
the right one). So what happens here, is that the closing brace is considered as
text by the compiler, and not a part of the program structure.

> \header {
>       lastupdated = "2005/September/5
> }
> 
> \version "2.5.29"

as far as the compiler is concerned, "lastupdated" is something like:
"2005/September/5 } \version"
it "thinks" that it's still in the \header section, since it hasn't found a
closing brace, and now stumbled upon a series of numbers ( 2.5.29" ) which
clearly shouldn't be there on its own. And that's why it points you to the
version number instead of the missing quote.

I hope this all makes sense,
All the best,
Andrew










reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]