Re: Combining \layout variables

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:

> David, you wrote Tuesday, May 05, 2015 8:00 PM
>
>
>> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> David, you wrote Tuesday, May 05, 2015 7:14 PM
>>>
>>>
>>>> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> David Kastrup wrote Tuesday, May 05, 2015 5:44 PM
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The answer to both these questions is that the satb.ly template
>>>>>>> comes after the user's code in the input file.  So the overriding
>>>>>>> operates the wrong way round.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So maybe just override when there is no setting yet?  Isn't that what
>>>>>> the template does with music variables as well?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's what I was intending to do originally, but the easy
>>>>> way is all or nothing - if the user sets any definition
>>>>> all the defaults vanish.
>>>> 
>>>> Sigh.  Decide yourself.  First you stated that the user settings are
>>>> loaded first, followed by the satb.ly template (which would consequently
>>>> be able to override single settings).
>>>
>>> Yes, the user settings are loaded first, and any setting in the
>>> template will then override any set by the user.  That's the
>>> wrong way round - the user should be able to override the template
>>> defaults.
>>>
>>>> Now you state that the satb.ly
>>>> template gets first with setting defaults.
>>>
>>> No, I didn't mean that, but I wasn't clear.  That paragraph
>>> was referring to using layout variables in the hope that the
>>> order could be inverted.  But then things work
>>> differently.  It is not possible to use layout variables
>>> in the same way as layout blocks.  That was my initial
>>> question - whether there was a way to make them work the same
>>> way as layout blocks.  If that were possible I could invert the
>>> order.
>> 
>> So use a layout block instead of a layout variable.  Or, as I stated, 
>
> But the order of overriding if I use layout blocks is the wrong
> way round: defaults override user.

Why would they?  Can you put together some example, something like 10
lines at most for "user" and "template" that demonstrate what you
consider the problem?

Right now I can't make head nor tails from the oscillating statements
about who will override whom.

>>>>>> So maybe just override when there is no setting yet?  Isn't that
>>>>>> what the template does with music variables as well?
>> 
>> for individual settings in the current layout.
>
> This seems the only way.  I've no idea how to do that from Scheme,
> so I'll go digging.  Any clues?

Like with music variables.  Can you please cook up some small example of
what you'd want to work?

There really is little point in repeating alternating contradictory
versions of what LilyPond is supposed to do wrong without actually
pinning some code to the statements.

-- 
David Kastrup