On 12/13/11 12:56 PM, "Ian Hulin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi all,
>The patch had to get pulled from staging as although it passed reg.
>tests it wouldn't compile the doc. I can easily fix the snippet in
>/Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly, but this leaves one more
>problem in the docs, this time in /extending/.
>
>I pulled out and tested the examples in separate .ly file and the
>format that fails is
>#(define-markup-command (double-box layout props text) (markup?)
> "Draw a double box around text."
> (interpret-markup layout props
> #{\markup \override #'(box-padding . 0.4) \box
> \override #'(box-padding . 0.6) \box { $text }#}))
>\markup \double-box A
>
>but
>#(define-markup-command (double-box layout props text) (markup?)
> "Draw a double box around text."
> (interpret-markup layout props
> (markup #:override '(box-padding . 0.4) #:box
> #:override '(box-padding . 0.6) #:box text)))
>\markup \double-box A
>
>works fine. This is not restricted to the double-box thing, it's
>general to doing
>interpret-markup #{ \markup \markup-command #'par ... #} within a
>#(define-markup-command ... ) block. I'd like to deprecate this as I
>think it's nasty, smelly, evil and kludgy and ask that users use
>
>interpret-markup ( markup #:markup-command 'par ... ) instead.
>
>We'd mark this as such in NEWS, meanwhile taking out the offending
>examples from /extending/.
>
>WDYT?
I think that David Kastrup is working like crazy to make #{ #} work very
well. Before we give up and put an arbitrary restriction, we ought to
give him a chance to see if he can solve the problem.
If he can't, I support your proposal. But I expect that he will identify
and fix the problem.
Thanks,
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
