Re: Notation Reference typo

[Graham Percival]

On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 02:29:30PM +0100, Eyolf ?strem wrote:
> Ugly, ugly. This is one of my main gripes with LP, this damned freedom of
> choice which creeps in everywhere and makes everything more complicated,
> not easier, because it blurs one's conception of the syntax.

Well, then:
1) volunteer to do more doc work (ie proofreading the manual)
2) forget about the shortcuts you know (such as omitting the #),
and follow the manual exactly.

Problem solved.

> If the '#' isn't needed, why keep it as the thing one has to learn? For
> future compatibility?

It reinforces the notion that it's a scheme argument.  The # is
required for numbers, so having it everywhere (including strings)
means that users will be less likely to forget them for numbers.
See LM 4.1.4 for a great overview of tweaking, especially the
"general syntax of this command", which uses the "#value" format.

PS I'm very serious about "forget about the shortcuts you know and
follow the manual exactly"; we've done a lot of work to clarify
these things, so if you think "oh, I've used lilypond for the past
10 years; I don't need to read the newbie manual", you'll miss a
lot of these clarifications.

Cheers,
- Graham