Hi Janneke, That was elegant. :-)
Nope---haven't seen it. (Or, at least I do not remember it.) Maybe I should have a look at what the optimizer can do about Mark's code. (As you might have seen, my code is a modification of the method syntax implementation itself.) Any opinions on what is best: Having a define-method* or having the functionality in define-method itself? Best regards, Mikael On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 11:00 PM <jann...@gnu.org> wrote: > Mikael Djurfeldt writes: > > Hi Mikael, > > > Since there are no comments, I'm inclined to apply this patch. I will do > > that on Sunday if there are no comments before that. > > Just FYI, have you seen the attached patch by Mark Weaver? I've been > carrying that for some time now, functionality like this is very > welcome. > > Greetings, > Janneke > > > -- > Janneke Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond > https://LilyPond.org > Freelance IT https://www.JoyOfSource.com | Avatar® > https://AvatarAcademy.com >
