Thanks, Aaron. On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 4:46 PM Aaron Hill <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2020-10-18 1:38 pm, Dave Seidel wrote: > > Very cool, thanks! I'm curious -- could aBook and aBookPart have been > > written as a lambda, or is it cleaner to use a void function? > > (Re-adding the mailing list on the thread for visibility.) > > To get the benefits of LilyPond's Scheme functions, you would need to > use one of the define-*-function family. Since it is our intention here > not to return any value, we use the void function. > > If you do not need any parameters, you can certainly invoke procedures > like print-book-with-defaults or ly:book-add-bookpart! without wrapping > them in a function. Though, without parameterization, I would wonder > why you could not just use \book or \bookpart directly. > > > -- Aaron Hill >
