> -----Original Message----- > From: Carl D. Sorensen > Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 7:48 AM > > > > independenty of this > > > > \book { > > \score { > > \layout { > > %% A > > } > > } > > \paper { > > %% B > > } > > } > > > > means > > > > \book { > > \score { > > \layout { \$defaultlayout > > %% A > > } > > } > > \paper { \$defaultpaper > > %% B > > } > > } > > > > Perhaps part of the confusion about the overall structure of > LilyPond arises from the fact that sometimes (e.g. when > identifiers are used), the order of statements matter; while > at other times (e.g. %B being a place to lookup layout > variables from %A) the order doesn't matter. In fact, in the > lookup process you described above, there is no clue in the > file that (i) %B is defined for a \book, (ii) the \score is > contained in a \book, and (iii) the \layout of which %B is a > part is in any sort of scope that includes the \score of > which %A is a part.
I'm sorry -- I didn't read the example carefully enough. My comment applies to the syntax with the \book missing, where it is implicit, rather than explicit. Carl Sorensen _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel