Joe Neeman <joenee...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, 2010-01-19 at 22:25 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> ---
>> .../extending/programming-interface.itely | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely
>> b/Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely
>> index 4bae49a..3806d35 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely
>> +++ b/Documentation/extending/programming-interface.itely
>> @@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ can be inserted with a grob closure. Here is a setting
>> from
>> @code{AccidentalSuggestion},
>>
>> @example
>> -(X-offset .
>> +`(X-offset .
>> ,(ly:make-simple-closure
>> `(,+
>> ,(ly:make-simple-closure
>
> This code is lifted from scm/define-grobs.scm, where it appears without
> the backtick.
No, it doesn't. The backtick is just at some outer layer in the
definition. Not printing it makes as little sense as not printing an
initial quote character when quoting stuff with string escapes: the
example makes no syntactical sense without this added context.
> Perhaps the real problem is that it is presented out of context. That
> is, maybe we should have
>
> \override AccidentalSuggestion #'X-offset = (ly:make-simple-closure ...)
>
> instead.
The whole context that is needed is "`" as far as I am concerned.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
