Re: Making a \layout definition in Scheme

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 04.04.2018 um 19:25 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> OK, but now I have a follow-up question which is quite similar to my
>>> other post from today (and I'm afraid the answer is similarly
>>> embarrassing):
>>>
>>> I managed to install an editionID to a specific movement's score with
>>> this code:
>>>
>>>        (ly:score-add-output-def! score
>>>          #{
>>>            \layout {
>>>              \context {
>>>                \Score
>>>                #(editionID #f movement-path)
>>>              }
>>>            }
>>>          #})
>>>
>>> which actually works when I use that "movement-path" variable to
>>> address  in \editionMod later.
>>>
>>> However, I would like to be able to also write this without the
>>> permanent switches,
>> Permanent switches?  Huh?
>
> Well, 'permanent' is of course the wrong word. What I'm (somewhat)
> taking issue with is switching languages back and forth within one
> expression.

Because?

>>> i.e. in pure Scheme syntax.
>> Why?  Seriously.
>
> My project library is getting more and more pure Scheme code, and
> while sometimes I wonder if it's worth the effort it usually turns out
> to do so, for example because things immediately become easier to
> maintain or extend afterwards.

How so?

-- 
David Kastrup