Re: Working on issue 665, how to proceed?

[Thomas Morley]

Am So., 17. Nov. 2019 um 14:08 Uhr schrieb <address@hidden>:
>
> I followed your suggestion and added a the filename to the output, also now 
> it is possible to use no header.

Thanks.

> Further the resulting filename is defined in the musicxml.ly, and is 
> <basename>.xml if the function is called with a music expression as argument,
> and is <basename>-score.xml if you call the function with a score as argument.
>
> I think the jaap-test-01.xml file you have is the result from your earlier 
> try, when you used {R1} as an argument to the function.

Sounds reasonable ;)


Meanwhile I started to look closer at musicxml.scm

Please insert verbose code-comments what you're doing and why.
I know LilyPonds codebase is _not_ an ideal example for that, to not
only my own displeasure.

For toplevel-comments please use semicolons, don't format them as strings.

You use (oop goops).
Is there need for it? This is a question not a hidden request!
Speaking only for myself, I'm not familar with it. So reviewing your
code will be difficult for me.
We don't use it much so far.

Furthermore, I'd use SRFI-1. Add it to musicxm-module and a lot of
basic procedures are available.
I think you can replace
foldl by fold
foldr by fold-right
filter is builtin
find-first/last may be simplified then

For
(define-method (list:count (self <list>))
why not use `length´ or `length+´, and why not simple `define´?

any is builtin

You may have a look at lily-library.scm as well. Starting at line 500
there are some functions you may consider to use.


Your musicxml.scm has currently 2390 lines. Any chance to split it up
in shorter pieces. Very hard to review otherwise.
And there is musicxml.ly and xml-library.scm as well.


Best,
  Harm