Re: What's the idea with the $papers stack?

[David Kastrup]

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 6:32 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> The only place where it is "pushed" is when creating a _new_ book, and
>> then it is cleared out immediately before it.  What kind of pushing is
>> that supposed to be?  What does that even mean?  A paper block in a book
>> definition manipulated the top book entry, except when looking at a book
>> identifier.  So the following crashes:
>>
>>
>>
>> Does anybody have a clue what the $papers stack is supposed to be for?
>> When accessing paper variables, LilyPond looks through that "stack".
>> That's where things like book-specific filenames will be kept.
>
> Output definitions (paper, bookpaper) are nested so you can set global
> layout at book level, and still have per-movement overrides.

per-movement overrides?  No.  book is the deepest level you can get to
with regard to the paper stack.

> Stacking N output definitions is as much work as stacking 2, so I
> guess I made it generic.

But you are not stacking 2.  The stack has at most a size of 1.
$defaultpaper is never made a member of $papers.

> Of course, few people if any ever used this feature.

Since it isn't actually there, that is not much of a surprise.

There might be some minuscule reason for it if bookparts participated in
the stack.  However, bookparts are distinguished from books by not
having a paper definition of their own.

-- 
David Kastrup