Hello Martin,
On 29/07/16 21:32, catalaco - wrote:
The last paragraph of 1.2.2 LilyPond
variables<http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/extending/lilypond-variables>
in Extending LilyPond<http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/extending/index> is
very hard to understand.
The whole thing might need to be rewritten but I don't understand enough to do
that. All I can do is offer suggestions for rephrasing, although I might be
misinterpreting as I'm not fully understanding what I'm reading!
Original text
-------
The usual way to refer to Lilypond variables, LilyPond Scheme
syntax<http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/extending/lilypond-scheme-syntax>,
is to call them using a backslash, i.e., \twentyFour.
Since this creates a copy of the value for most of LilyPond’s internal types,
in particular music expressions, music functions don’t usually create copies of
material they change. For this reason, music expressions given with # should
usually not contain material that is not either created from scratch or
explicitly copied rather than directly referenced.
-------
Rephrased
-------
Lilypond variables are usually called using a backslash, e.g. \twentyFour (see
LilyPond Scheme
syntax<http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/extending/lilypond-scheme-syntax>),
which creates a copy of the value. For that reason music functions in LilyPond don't
usually create copies of material they change. Because of this, scheme music
expressions written with the # syntax should not directly reference material. They
should only be used for material created from scratch or explicitly copied.
-------
Greetings,
Martin
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Thanks, ticket created:
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4948/
Regards
--
--
James
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
