On Fri, 2015-04-24 at 23:05 +0100, Richard Shann wrote: > On Fri, 2015-04-24 at 15:46 -0500, Éloi Rivard wrote: > > Hi, > > I am currently working on a NoteworthyComposer file importer when I > > have some free time. It works pretty well so far, I can open files and > > do a lot of stuff. I am blocking on repeats, voltas (1st, 2nd endings > > etc.), and non-classic barlines, especially because I don't understand > > some things in denemo. > So these are all Denemo Directives, created by scripts such as > d-RepeatEnd which looks like this: > > ;;RepeatEnd > (StandAloneSelfEditDirective (cons "RepeatEnd" "\\bar \":|.\"") #f > "RepeatEnd") > (d-DirectivePut-standalone-gx "RepeatEnd" 10) > (d-MoveCursorRight) >
Actually, this has made me think that the discussions on the mailing list with Andreas concerning his CapXML importer: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/denemo-devel/2015-04/msg00061.html are highly relevant here: if you are generating a .denemo format file from C you will have to embed the current LilyPond syntax for RepeatEnd in your C code (or avoid doing so by some to-be-invented route). So this is a more powerful argument than any in that thread as to why it is better to generate a Scheme script from the input and then execute it to generate the Denemo score: we never change the semantics of (d-RepeatEnd) while LilyPond quite recently changed the syntax for this command. Richard _______________________________________________ Denemo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/denemo-devel
