On 2015/07/10 11:17:37, dak wrote:
On 2015/07/10 10:50:55, http://mark_opus11.net wrote: > On 2015/07/10 10:34:24, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > If I understand this correctly it permits a variable definition to
be used
in > > some circumstances where a music function definition would
previously have
> been > > required to achieve the same effect. That seems a worthwhile
improvement
and > > simplification. > > Will this also work with \markup? e.g.: > > redBold = \markup \with-color #red \bold \incomplete > > \redBold "text"
A nice illustration of my "can of worms" theory.
It would be quite straightforward to make this work for the case where
there is
only a final markup missing since the grammar already special-cases
this kind of
markup chain.
Well, oopsy daisy. It's quite uncomplicated with regard to the grammar. But there is a tiny complication: as opposed to music functions et al, markup commands have a different namespace, are supported by the markup macro, and are not anonymous: defining a markup command does not just define one name but a whole slew of them. So redBold = ... cannot define a markup command (and never could). I could instead define a scheme command returning a markup. I think that those should work in comparable circumstances. https://codereview.appspot.com/249670043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
