Issue 4002: Mention backslash escaping in Scheme.

Clarify confusion about `@code{\foo}' vs. `@code{\\foo}'.

Issue on tracker:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4002

[dak, 2014-07-09 23:46:36]

https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
File Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:950:
@samp{The@tie{}@@code@{@bs{}foo@}@tie{}command}).  However, if a
Why write @bs{} instead of \ here?

https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:951: Texinfo string is within a block
of Scheme code, it must be
That's incorrect.  Correct would be:
However, within double-quoted Scheme and/or LilyPond strings, backslashes
(including those ending up in Texinfo markup) need to be escaped by doubling
them.

There is no such thing as a "Texinfo string", and it is not contained in "Scheme
code" but rather in strings.

https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:955: "The @@code@{@bs{}@bs{}foo@}
command..."
That's awfully unreadable source code.  I'd be tempted to use @verbatim instead
in order to avoid all the Texinfo escapes.  Also there is no point in writing
@bs{}@bs{} instead of \\ here.

[Mark Polesky, 2014-07-09 23:55:49]

On 2014/07/09 23:46:36, dak wrote:
>
https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
> Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:950:
> @samp{The@tie{}@@code@{@bs{}foo@}@tie{}command}).  However, if a
> Why write @bs{} instead of \ here?

Because we're in a @warning block.

>
https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
> Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:951: Texinfo string is within a block
> of Scheme code, it must be
> That's incorrect.  Correct would be:
> However, within double-quoted Scheme and/or LilyPond strings, backslashes
> (including those ending up in Texinfo markup) need to be escaped by doubling
> them.
> 
> There is no such thing as a "Texinfo string", and it is not contained in
"Scheme
> code" but rather in strings.

Okay

>
https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
> Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:955: "The @@code@{@bs{}@bs{}foo@}
> command..."
> That's awfully unreadable source code.  I'd be tempted to use @verbatim
instead
> in order to avoid all the Texinfo escapes.  Also there is no point in writing
> @bs{}@bs{} instead of \\ here.

Again, I think the @bs{} is needed in a @warning block, but I'll try verbatim.

Thanks,
Mark

[Mark Polesky, 2014-07-10 00:29:24]

On 2014/07/09 23:55:49, Mark Polesky wrote:
> On 2014/07/09 23:46:36, dak wrote:
>
https://codereview.appspot.com/112040043/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/doc...
> > Documentation/contributor/doc-work.itexi:955: "The @@code@{@bs{}@bs{}foo@}
> > command..."
> > That's awfully unreadable source code.  I'd be tempted to
> > use @verbatim instead in order to avoid all the Texinfo
> > escapes.  Also there is no point in writing @bs{}@bs{}
> > instead of \\ here.

No other combination of solutions worked.  @warning disallows backslashes and
@verbatim blocks.  Personally, I don't really mind about the unreadable source
code, as long as it's clear in the CG.  Thanks for the clarified text.