Štěpán Němec <step...@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:22:09 +0200 > David Kastrup wrote: > >> What would people prefer for creating a Lilypond function that returns >> an "unspecified" value (what the Guile read-eval-print loop takes as a >> hint to print nothing at all) and is called for its side effect? >> >> define-void-function or define-procedure? The first is a bit more >> C-ish, the second more Pascal-ish. I am not going to consider >> define-subroutine though. > > Given that in the Scheme world, "procedure" is the standard term for > functions in general, `define-procedure' would IMO be a rather > unfortunate name for something used to define _only_ that subset of > procedures which return an unspecified value, if that's what you mean.
Ok. Now unfortunately, Guile has a number of functions that one would expect to return SCM_UNSPECIFIED, but which return something else. hashq-set!, set-object-property! and a few others. So I need a nice way to tell Lilypond to ignore a Scheme expression even though it looks like it could be used as a valid Lilypond construct. I considered \call #(hashq-set! ... but it is a bit misleading since the Scheme expression would be called anyway. There is also \ignore #(hashq-set! ... but it sounds a bit like nothing would happen. \do #(hashq-set! ... looks nice, but due to namespace pollution, it is already taken by Guile, quite like \eval. All in all, I can't think of anything better than \ignore. An alternative syntax like ##(...) or ##[...] seems a bit too sneaky to me. One other possibility would be \void. It might look a bit nicer: \void #(hashq-set! ...) \void #(hashq-set! ...) rather than \ignore #(hashq-set! ...) \ignore #(hashq-set! ...) It's a bit C-ish, but not all that bad, and it fits with define-void-function. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
