|
From: | Kieren Richard MacMillan |
Subject: | Re: "inline" (scoped) definitions? |
Date: | Thu, 15 Jan 2004 09:10:04 -0500 |
Hello, David:
In your example, you are illustrating an editing task. It would be quicker to copy the notes, even if there were a lot more of them.
My example was a straight repetition, certainly, but in concept I was imagining uses far beyond that... Imagine, for just one example, if the set were to be manipulated (e.g., transposed, inverted, etc.): that is no longer an "editing task", and copy-paste would no longer seem (as) efficient to me.
Putting definitions all in one place makes the file easier to maintain through syntax changes. Hunting down multiple definitions through a score could be hardly any fun at all.
Actually, using my example syntax (==), I imagine finding inline definitions would be fairly simple in any reasonable text editor.
Regards, Kieren.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |