lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 11:04:18 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux)

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> If I write
> myC =
> #(define-music-function (parser location) () #{ c #})
> then I can't currently write
> <\myC>4 or similar.  It would just not work.  And there is no way to
> define this function, #{ #} or not, in a manner that could work both in
> chords as well as outside (without a Rhythmic Event iterator).
>
>> This is the part that I have the most trouble imagining, not because I
>> don't trust you, but because I don't follow the code well enough to
>> know how it would result in this.  I'd like to see regtests in one of
>> these commits that uses two or three simple functions in the form \foo
>> c and <\foo c> that show this distinction.
>
> Is the above simple enough?

If it isn't, try

myC=c

No need to even stoop to music functions.  In this case, <\myC> will not
work without the change in parsing.

-- 
David Kastrup




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]