scheme interface for all LilyPond syntactic constructs

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

address@hidden writes:
> The goal of course is to help users (hmm, it cannot be only me, there
> must be few others!) creating scheme functions. Collateral damage:
> internal function definitions may also be simpler.
> 
> Do you think that could actually be interesting? ie: should I go on
> implementing and documenting this?

I'm not sure, I don't feel a pressing need for this, but if this
"library" would be properly separated, we could ship it in some way.

> Note: There is some overlap with some functions from
> music-functions.scm.

If we go this route, the overlap should be merged.


-- 

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