Hi, When defining a user markup command, it would be better not to modify at all the variables from the (lily) module, even if you took care of the memory leak. Also, there is one file to be deleted, and the associated \include to be removed from an init .ly file.
Nicolas http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6002 File ly/markup-init.ly (left): http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6002#oldcode5 ly/markup-init.ly:5: %%;; to be define later, in a closure If this file is empty, then it shall be deleted http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6007 File scm/markup.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6007#newcode101 scm/markup.scm:101: (set! body (cddr body))) Why is this needed? Could #:allow-other-keys take care of that? http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6007#newcode131 scm/markup.scm:131: ;; Register the new function, for markup documentation I still have the feeling that user defined commands should not modify variables from (lily) module. Could there be e.g. a module check, so that the macro expand into the documentation related settings only for builtin commands? http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6007#newcode168 scm/markup.scm:168: (set! body (cddr body))) Same as above. http://codereview.appspot.com/160048/diff/4008/6007#newcode199 scm/markup.scm:199: (hashq-set! markup-list-functions ,command-name #t) Same as for define-markup-command http://codereview.appspot.com/160048 _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
