"[email protected]" <[email protected]> writes: > Hey all, > > Just a note to letchya'll know that there'll be 7(ish) people > attending Extreme Makeover: Markup Edition in Paris over the weekend > of the 15th. The idea is to make the behavior of markups more robust > (likely by treating them like objects (not in the pejorative sense of > the term "treating like objects"...the CS sense) instead of a set of > instructions to be fed to stencils). This will likely touch > everything, from the parser/lexer to perhaps "Engravers" for markups > (i.e. Line_markup_engraver) to refashioning code in Pango to whatever. > > We'll have Skype open for the duration of coding hours for those who > want to participate à distance, but if any of you would like to chime > in on markups before this weekend, please do!
I am actually just working on the syntax to make markups (more precisely: any scalar) acceptable as the last argument of type Scheme (namely non-specific) to music functions and their ilk. The principal motivation is being able to convert \mark with its current semantics into a music function as well, and of course be able to harvest this increased kind of flexibility of the final argument for user-defined functions. While I don't expect much overlap in our endeavors (I don't actually look inside markups for mine), it is likely that you'll get merge conflicts on any patches based on material of mine. I've also considered adding define-markup-function (in analogy to the existing define-*-function commands). It would be orthogonal to the existing define-markup-command in that the latter works only _inside_ of markups, while the former works _outside_ of markups. I've not yet seen an existing application clamoring for this, so I have not yet bothered. It would be reasonably simple to do, however. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
