> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl D. Sorensen
> Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 7:48 AM
> >
> > independenty of this
> >
> > \book {
> > \score {
> > \layout {
> > %% A
> > }
> > }
> > \paper {
> > %% B
> > }
> > }
> >
> > means
> >
> > \book {
> > \score {
> > \layout { \$defaultlayout
> > %% A
> > }
> > }
> > \paper { \$defaultpaper
> > %% B
> > }
> > }
> >
>
> Perhaps part of the confusion about the overall structure of
> LilyPond arises from the fact that sometimes (e.g. when
> identifiers are used), the order of statements matter; while
> at other times (e.g. %B being a place to lookup layout
> variables from %A) the order doesn't matter. In fact, in the
> lookup process you described above, there is no clue in the
> file that (i) %B is defined for a \book, (ii) the \score is
> contained in a \book, and (iii) the \layout of which %B is a
> part is in any sort of scope that includes the \score of
> which %A is a part.
I'm sorry -- I didn't read the example carefully enough. My comment applies to
the syntax with the \book missing, where it is implicit, rather than explicit.
Carl Sorensen
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
