Ralph Palmer-3 wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:54 AM, -Eluze <elu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> hi >> >> everybody knows how cumbersome it is to write parameters in a shell - it >> would be nice to have them in a lilypond file. >> >> LilyPond provides an alternative for many of the command line options but >> they are not well documented in an appropriate context. >> >> here is a list of the approx 50 command line options provided by LilyPond >> (with -dhelp or #(ly:option-usage)) with their counterparts in LilyPond. >> http://old.nabble.com/file/p33107771/doptions%2Bdefine%2Bdefault.csv >> doptions+define+default.csv >> >> most of them work as expected (I only checked about half of the items >> under >> Windows 7) with a few exceptions: >> >> show-available-fonts <---> #(ly:font-config-display-fonts) >> help <---> #(ly:option-usage) >> read-file-list (get error messages; how is it supposed to be used?) >> verbose <---> #(ly:set-option 'verbose #t) --> no result >> >> >> my suggestion is to add the internal functions to the "Application Usage" >> manual. >> > > I'm not sure I understand what Eluze is asking - include the internal > functions directly into LilyPond, > that would be great (2nd step)
> document their current presence in LilyPond in the "Application Usage" > manual, > maybe as a first step! > or something else (a combination?). > definitely! I'll think about a possibility (next week) Eluze -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/internal-LilyPond-functions-instead-of--d-options-tp33107771p33132825.html Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
