2015-12-10 11:58 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <[email protected]>: > Thomas Morley <[email protected]> writes: > >> Not sure why >> foo-markup = \markup \bold \with-color #cyan \markletter \etc >> \markup \foo #1 >> does not work, as opposed to >> bold-red-markup = \markup \bold \with-color #red \etc >> \markup \bold-red "text" > > Anyway, should this rather work using the syntax > > \markup bold-red = \bold \with-color #red \etc > > ? this would have the advantage of hiding the way \markup introduces > its own name space, and one could use the full define-markup-command > resulting in (markup #:bold-red ...) and make-bold-red-markup working as > well.
Nice advantages. > But it seems weird to use this for \etc-style functions only. And right now \markup bold-red prints the string "bold-red". Having \markup bold-red = <ẃhat-ever> ,i.e. a definition might lead to confusions. Is it possible to create a sort-of-markup-macro to be used like: \sort-of-markup-macro sort-of-markup-macro-name = <whatever> instead? (Just brain-storming) > And the > whole markup-macro machinery is crazy anyway. I trust your expertise. Cheers, Harm _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
