Hi Patrick,
On Thu 18 Aug 2011 07:50:28 BST, [email protected] wrote:
>
> The load-order issue appears to be fixed, testing with git and guile 1.8
> and 2.0.2. Ignoring whitespace changes, this patch LGTM.
>
> Some more shuffling is needed to make sure we have markup commands
> defined where they need to be, but that's beyond the scope of this
> patch.
>
Should we have a Lilypond Markup Syntax/Guile V2 Tracker, then?
If there are any dependencies in the load list that you know about that
can still bite us could we record these in the tracker, for instance the
markup command itself works with both Guile 1.8 and 2.0 if it is loaded
later in the list in a module apart from markup-macros.scm, but fails
with 2.0 if you move the definition from markup.scm to the bottom of
markup-macros.scm.
There are also some design issues to consider like:
* Would the markup.scm and markup-macros.scm definitions work better
as a SCM module?
* Should we/can we move over to making the markup subsystem hygienic
by using define-syntax?
o (This is quite a big piece of work, and last time I tried
looking at it, it seemed like it should be simple but made my
head hurt).
o It's a translation exercise very like doing the document
translation, and currently *definitely* needs to be done by a
human being rather than software.
Current plans once this is pushed is to tackle Tracker 1780 (Guile V2
squawking with deprecation errors because of (format) calls without a
destination parameter) and then get back to Tracker 1686 (tackling the
issue of scheme compilation).
>
> Thanks,
> Patrick
>
> https://codereview.appspot.com/4849054/
Cheers,
Ian
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
