Re: headers, and what include doesn't do

[Jean Abou Samra]

Hi David,

Le 17/10/2020 à 05:45, David Wright a écrit :
> On Fri 16 Oct 2020 at 15:50:55 (+0200), Jean Abou Samra wrote:
>
> The reason for that is that \version, like \include, has nothing to do
> with LP's functionality. \version is just a syntax property of the
> file containing it. Used sensibly, it allows convert-ly to convert a
> collection of files of different syntax vintages automatically,
> without your having to specify the vintage of each file in the command
> line. (It just reads the \version contained in each file.)
>
> Yes, LP warns about the top-level file not containing a \version,
> and generates an error message (and sets a return code) whenever
> it meets a version number greater than its own. But so long as the
> actual syntax encountered does not violate its own version, LP's
> processing is unaffected, which is the point I'm trying to make.

I checked this and you are right.I thought there was an internal
mechanism for scoping, but investigation of the source code shows that
\version is actually recognized by a lexer rule.

> Were the OP to carry out the cut&paste as I suggested, and possibly
> reduce each movement to, say, a dozen measures, it might be easier
> to appreciate the logical structure of the sonata's source without
> being confused by the irrelevant physical structure of the files.
> That's why I posted the two example files demonstrating which
> lines in foo.ly generate which annotations in foo.pdf. (One hopes
> that the OP is using an editor that can re-indent the pasted-together
> source, which might also help to clarify the overall structure.)

Yes, absolutely. I was not trying to contradict you but just to
expand on your answer.

Cheers,
Jean