On 2017-11-19 12:12 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
I fail to see why it uses different syntax for embedding LilyPond code than lilypond-book does, though. Why not make it compatible by just adding the right \usepackage invocation?
Actually, the package does define some aliases which should allow mostly for a `\usepackage` drop in. Full compatibility, however, I don't think is possible because of command conflict:
It is not possible to have a command named `\lilypond` and an environment named `lilypond` in the same LaTeX document. Internally, `\newenvironment{lilypond}` defines two commands: `\lilypond` and `\endlilypond` (which correspond to `\begin{lilypond}` and `\end{lilypond}`). The former command will conflict with attempts to define `\lilypond` as an independent command (raising an "Command already defined" error). Since lilypond-book is a preprocessor which swaps out these sections for valid code based on `\includegraphics` it can ignore this LaTeX restriction. Since lyluatex functions from within LaTeX, it cannot.
-- ✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝✝ Br. Samuel, OSB St. Anselm’s Abbey Washington, DC (R. Padraic Springuel) PAX ☧ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
