Re: lilypond grammar in the contributor guide

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

thanks, I'll take this as an OK to drop grammar from the manual.

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 12:19 AM David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> >> We have a dump of the bison grammar in the contributor guide (see
> >> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor/lilypond-grammar).
> >>
> >> Is there any value in keeping this? It complicates the generation, as
> >> it is a cross-directory dependency.
> >
> > Much of LilyPond's language has been offloaded to music functions and
> > the parsing of music function arguments uses synthetic tokens and to a
> > good degree is directed not as much from the rules but the underlying
> > actions.
> >
> > As an end user tool, it
>
> by which I mean the printed Bison grammar
>
> > reflects far too little of what the input
> > language of LilyPond is about.  And it does not contain enough to work
> > with when placed, say, in the CG.  While one might want to think about
> > whether the responsible scripts could in any useful manner be
> > contributed to Bison
>
> by which I mean the GNU project "Bison"
>
> > (after all, Texinfo is the official GNU
> > documentation language), for LilyPond itself it does no longer make much
> > sense in my opinion.
> >
> > It
>
> (the printed Bison grammar)
>
> > allows interpreting the output of -ddebug-parser of a binary
>
> by which I mean a LilyPond binary
>
> > corresponding to the version of the NR.  But the complexity of
> > LilyPond's grammar is such that I would not expect somebody not working
> > with a full checkout-out source to be likely in a capacity of
> > interpreting the respective traces of Bison.
>
> Sorry for writing too much between the lines.
>
> --
> David Kastrup



-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen