On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 09:05:25AM +0000, Richard Shann wrote: > On Tue, 2012-12-25 at 08:36 +0000, Colin Hall wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:14:16PM +0000, Richard Shann wrote: > > > This snippet (from the 2.16 manual > > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/expressive-marks-attached-to-notes#index-DynamicText > > > ) > > > > > > moltoF = #(make-dynamic-script > > > (markup #:normal-text "molto" > > > #:dynamic "f")) > > > \relative c' { > > > <d e>16 <d e> > > > <d e>2..\moltoF > > > } > > > > > > gives a bad textedit:/// link in the pdf output to 0:0:0 > > > > > > I came across this via my own example and discovered that putting the > > > definition in line shows no bug, so I sent it to the user list thinking > > > my syntax was buggy, then I found the above snippet, so I guess this is > > > a bug. > > > > David Kastrup and I have tried to reproduce your bug report and we > > don't see a problem. > > I have just re-tried and cannot reproduce it either, (sorry)
That's fine, Richard. Glad to hear that it is working for you. > you cannot simply replace all \moltoF by the appropriate amount of > the text following the = sign in the definition. Yes. As David wrote on lilypond-user, one has to follow the examples here: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/expressive-marks-attached-to-notes#new-dynamic-marks > He also pointed out that replacing the # by $ did allow this construct > to be inserted directly > > But I have been completely unable to track down a reference > to this $ notation in the docs :( I had a look and I can't find it either. In fact I had trouble tracking down documentation of the "#(" syntax but found this: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/substitution-function-syntax I thought I might find "$" or "dollar" in here: http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/lilypond-grammar but no, I could not. It looks like "$(" is a new, undocumented feature which permits an alternative syntax for "substitution functions" and also allows for them to be used in-line. > Thank you for looking at this and once again apologies for the mistaken > report. You're very welcome. Thanks for identifying that gap in the docs. Cheers, Colin. -- Colin Hall _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
