Re: lilypond ./ChangeLog ./darwin.patch Documentati...

[Graham Percival]

On 19-Feb-06, at 4:50 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote:

> Quoting Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>
> > Index: lilypond/Documentation/user/programming-interface.itely
> > diff -u lilypond/Documentation/user/programming-interface.itely:1.47 
> > lilypond/Documentation/user/programming-interface.itely:1.48
> > --- lilypond/Documentation/user/programming-interface.itely:1.47	Mon 
> > Feb  6 01:23:40 2006
> > +++ lilypond/Documentation/user/programming-interface.itely	Sun Feb 
> > 19 04:05:00 2006
> > @@ -87,11 +87,25 @@
> > @{ #(ly:export (make-sequential-music (list newLa))) @}
> > @end example
> >
> > +Scheme code is evaluated as soon as the parser encounters it.  To
> > +define some scheme code in a macro (to be called later), use
> > +
> > address@hidden
> > +#(define (nopc)
> > +  (ly:set-option 'point-and-click #f))
> > +#(nopc)
> > +
> > +...
> > +\nopc
> > +{ c'4 }
> > address@hidden example
> > +
>
>
> Is this really correct? #(define ... ) defines the Scheme function.
> #(nopc) runs it. Is \nopc just another syntax for #(nopc) ?

Er, I confess that I have no idea.  I was trying to summarize the 
"Defining shortcuts for scheme code", since it looked like useful 
information.  But on second glance, it looks like Han-Wen's solution 
involved calling it with #(nopc), while Erik's solution had a different 
definition but was called with \nopc.

I'll include both methods.
- Graham