On 4/26/10 11:19 AM, "Graham Percival" <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> On 4/26/10 10:21 AM, "Graham Percival" <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> I object to the scheme indentation -- to the extent that we have a
>>> standard for lilypond input files (which isn't much), we follow
>>> normal scheme indentation.
>>
>> The new patch actually follows normal Scheme indentation, where the previous
>> examples didn't.
>
> Really? Oops, sorry. I just assumed that all the really old stuff
> would have been auto-formatted by emacs and would be correct.
Well, it sort of is.
The problem is that the #{ throws off the emacs Scheme editor (at least I
assume that's what happens).
So there are two reasonably compliant choices for indentation.
#(define-music-function (parser location args)
(arg-type-list)
(music-function-return))
or
#(define-music-function
(parser location args)
(arg-type-list)
(music-function-return))
The previous code, because of the #{, did the following:
#(define-music-function (parser location args)
(arg-type-list)
#{ music-function-return #})
or sometimes
#(define-music-function (parser location args)
(arg-type-list)
#{
music-function-return
#})
HTH,
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
