Hi David, On 29/10/11 13:22, David Kastrup wrote: > Ian Hulin <[email protected]> writes: > >> Hi David, I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think >> you're trying to amend a section of manual here that needs a >> re-think/re-write. > > No flame war intended. As I said: I can't expend the effort to do > this well. I got annoyed by wrong information and corrected it. > > The point was that it is nonsensical to copy material with an > arcane function ly:music-deep-copy when you already got a copy > handed by Lilypond, which happens every time information passes > through a MUSIC_IDENTIFIER token (also the case for $music > constructs in #{ ... #}). When you refer to a variable via \music > in Lilypond, you already get a copy. When you refer to a variable > via #music in Scheme, you get the original. Lilypond's own music > functions have no qualms working destructively. There is no point > in the user trying to be different, in particular since there is a > dearth of convenience functions for that purpose. > >> !!Ping!!<< @image{Picture-of-lightbulb-lighting-up} Got it. >> I can have a look at this section and think about a redraft. >> Carl, do you have enough time to review a draft for Scheme-fu if >> I write the first draft in OpenOffice Write? > > I am willing to answer questions and look at drafts (though not in > Oowrite). > OK, I'll hack together a text file. Do you want to do this via e-mail or Rietveld? > But I don't have the resources to do this better myself. > OK. It's on my to-do list. I'll take a break from the Guile V2 Migration cave. . . Cheers, Ian
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
