Am 27.09.2016 um 15:22 schrieb Simon Albrecht: >> Advantages of this solution: All that could be done in c / c++ / >> postscript, no need for scheme. >> As there is no need to understand and change the blackbox lilypond >> it's much easier and faster >> to implement. > > That’s an interesting statement. I’d’ve thought the c++ part was the > ‘blackbox’ part of LilyPond and Scheme the connection to the surface… > But to each his own. >
The blackbox is neither the C++ nor the Scheme code but rather their interface (in terms of types and in terms of order of processing and passing information back and forth) and particularly how to programmatically access information from "within" LilyPond, i.e. the score representation growing during the compilation process. Which language is harder to understand is mostly a matter of personal experience, I think. Although probably a higher percentage of people beyond educated computer scientists have experience with C-like languages than with LISP-like ones. But in general the advantage of a feature being solvable in the Scheme domain is that it can be done in the "user space", that is, without having to compile LilyPond yourself. This is not only lowering the entry barrier but actually makes it possible to implement and test features on all supported platforms and not only on Linux. Urs
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
