> Subject: Re: music-function name shadowing a Scheme keyword
> Am 27.06.2018 um 11:15 schrieb Urs Liska:
> >
> >
> > Am 27.06.2018 um 11:09 schrieb Urs Liska:
> >> Hi Jan-Peter,
> >>
> >>
> >> Am 27.06.2018 um 10:48 schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt:
> >>> Hi Urs,
> >>>
> >>> you might import the SRFI-1 span-function and give that a new name.
> >>> The counterpart-function to span is break, which "conflicts with the
> >>> break binding established by while (see while do). Applications
> >>> wanting to use break from within a while loop will need to make a new
> >>> define under a different name."
> >>> You might provide such an alternative name for "span".
> >>>
> >>> Personally I'd prefer another name for your function, because
> >>> srfi-1-span is "prior art" ;-)
> >>> and *now* you can give it a name that does not conflict.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hm, I was afraid of that comment. I agree that asking users using my
> >> module to change any occurence of "span" to
> >> "span-saved-from-openlilylib" is no viable option ...
> >>
> >> However, what *would* be a suitable name, then? \span is just perfect.
> >> \markup would be good, or \tag, but of course ...
> >
> > * \class ("\class new" as shorthand for <span class="new">) (maybe
> > also too generic?)
> > * \tagSpan
> > * \markupSpan
> >
> > ?
> Yes, class is quite generic. I don't know, if it conflicts.
> IMO \tagSpan is a viable name.
>
+1
Or, along the same lines, since it creates a element in the DOM (Document
Object Model), and since "tag" already has an LP-specific meaning,
\domSpan
Elaine Alt
415 . 341 .4954 "*Confusion is
highly underrated*"
[email protected]
Producer ~ Composer ~ Instrumentalist
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
