Re: 13:35:08 up 20:27, 2 users, load average: 0.07, 0.07, 0.07 (issue 5464045)

[dak]

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly
File Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly#newcode20
Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly:20: #(use-modules (scm
markup-facility-defs))
I don't think we should require this use-modules in a normal document.
Is there a reason we can't just preload the module in the course of
normal Lilypond initialization?

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly#newcode34
Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly:34: (define (NWS-box-stencil
stencil thickness padding)
Does this reorganization mean that a markup command must not use a
command defined before it in a file?

I don't think we can explain this to users in a satisfactory way.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/input/regression/bookparts.ly
File input/regression/bookparts.ly (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/input/regression/bookparts.ly#newcode15
input/regression/bookparts.ly:15: (interpret-markup layout props
(fancy-format #f "address@hidden" page-number))))
Any idea why this would have worked before?

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/input/regression/profile-property-access.ly
File input/regression/profile-property-access.ly (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/input/regression/profile-property-access.ly#newcode37
input/regression/profile-property-access.ly:37: (map (lambda (x)
(fancy-format #f "~30a: address@hidden" (car x) (cdr x)))
This change is quite unrelated to the markup business.  We probably
should have a different patch for the fancy-format fixes.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/ly/titling-init.ly
File ly/titling-init.ly (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/ly/titling-init.ly#newcode2
ly/titling-init.ly:2: #(use-modules (scm markup-facility-defs))
This file does not appear to define or call a single macro.  Why is
markup-facility-defs needed here nevertheless?

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/scm/display-lily.scm
File scm/display-lily.scm (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/diff/2001/scm/display-lily.scm#newcode325
scm/display-lily.scm:325: ;;  now defined here (to aid Guile V2
migration)
I think we really need to get a hang about Guile's equivalents to
"include", documented or not.  We can't just stuff everything into one
large file because Guile can't be bothered documenting basic
functionality.  We use a lot of other basic, undocumented stuff as well.
 While Guile is documented as awful as it is, it can't be avoided.  If
you know about the functions/macros (likely by seeing what Guile itself
does), use them and report the missing docs on the Guile bug list.

http://codereview.appspot.com/5464045/