On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 06:12:03PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes: > > >> It seems nice to be able to add this sort of thing to Lilypond, but I > >> think it rather strongly demonstrates Lilypond's lack of modularity: > >> this sort of thing should sit in a separate directory and be loaded > >> on-demand under user control without needing any resident code parts > >> when people don't use it. > > > > If it was all done in scheme, this would be easy. :) > > I don't think so, since properties and contexts are defined and > initialized globally right now, and we don't have a system for > modularizing documentation.
Can't new contexts be defined by the user? I'll admit that I don't think they can create new properties... I was basically just thinking of things like ancient notation, or the beautiful "packages" / "files" / "modules" / "whatever we shoudl call them" that Reinhold and Nicholas put together, like stuff for title pages or orchestralily. As a naive ex-user, I'd call those "modules", but that might be misusing a technical term. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
