Am 14.08.2015 um 02:14 schrieb Dan Eble:
On Aug 13, 2015, at 09:36 , Simon Albrecht <[email protected]> wrote:
Am 01.08.2015 um 19:35 schrieb Dan Eble:
add a variant of \include which does nothing if the file does not exist
(eliminating one reason to have empty files in the first place)
[…]
surely we would want \include to complain if there has been a typo and it
should actually refer to an existing file. Since it’s hardly possible for Lily
to decide about the user’s intentions here, we might perhaps provide another
function with the behaviour you describe
That is what I had in mind when I wrote “a variant of \include”.
Of course. Sorry for overlooking that.
I suspect that \include is a parser keyword and thus a proper main code
base solution couldn’t be done in Scheme. However, it doesn’t seem
complicated, so if you can give a good naming suggestion and rationale
(i.e. a concise and convincing enhancement request to be tracked),
perhaps David K. (or somebody of our dozens of core developers :-/ ) can
come up with a patch.
The other route to go would be asking on -user for help with creating a
scheme function for your purposes, which you might then make accessible
through the LSR or openlilylib.
Yours, Simon
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
