Marek Klein has made a patch that allows the use of user-defined name suffixes for lilypond-book output files and eliminates automatically-generated numbers as part of the file name if the user specifies the suffixes.
The code he has shared is the following: > Thank you, > now it works as expected: > > (define counter-alist '()) > > (define (print-book-with parser book process-procedure) > (let* > ((paper (ly:parser-lookup parser '$defaultpaper)) > (layout (ly:parser-lookup parser '$defaultlayout)) > (output-suffix (ly:parser-lookup parser 'output-suffix)) > (output-count (assoc-ref counter-alist output-suffix)) > (base (ly:parser-output-name parser)) ) > > (if (string? output-suffix) > (set! base (format "~a-~a" base (string-regexp-substitute > "[^a-zA-Z0-9-]" "_" output-suffix)))) > > ;; must be careful: output-count is under user control. > (if (not (integer? output-count)) > (set! output-count 0)) > > (if (> output-count 0) > (set! base (format #f "~a-~a" base output-count))) > (set! counter-alist (assoc-set! counter-alist output-suffix (1+ > output-count))) Marek -- can you check to make sure the code doesn't break if -1 is specified as a suffix? I'm afraid that would pass as an integer, but not pass as >0, so nothing would happen. > > What about set! versus ly:parser-define! ? Can somebody answer Marek's question about set! vs ly:parser-define! ? I can't, so I don't want to hazard a guess. Also, this code needs a regtest, IMO. But the difference in the code will be in the names of the files produced, rather than the graphical output. Will this still be caught by make-check? Thanks, Carl P.S. Marek, you'll need to write a regression test and a documentation change to go along with the code change before it can be pushed. Thanks! _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
