On 12/13/11 12:56 PM, "Ian Hulin" <i...@hulin.org.uk> wrote:
>Hi all, >The patch had to get pulled from staging as although it passed reg. >tests it wouldn't compile the doc. I can easily fix the snippet in >/Documentation/snippets/three-sided-box.ly, but this leaves one more >problem in the docs, this time in /extending/. > >I pulled out and tested the examples in separate .ly file and the >format that fails is >#(define-markup-command (double-box layout props text) (markup?) > "Draw a double box around text." > (interpret-markup layout props > #{\markup \override #'(box-padding . 0.4) \box > \override #'(box-padding . 0.6) \box { $text }#})) >\markup \double-box A > >but >#(define-markup-command (double-box layout props text) (markup?) > "Draw a double box around text." > (interpret-markup layout props > (markup #:override '(box-padding . 0.4) #:box > #:override '(box-padding . 0.6) #:box text))) >\markup \double-box A > >works fine. This is not restricted to the double-box thing, it's >general to doing >interpret-markup #{ \markup \markup-command #'par ... #} within a >#(define-markup-command ... ) block. I'd like to deprecate this as I >think it's nasty, smelly, evil and kludgy and ask that users use > >interpret-markup ( markup #:markup-command 'par ... ) instead. > >We'd mark this as such in NEWS, meanwhile taking out the offending >examples from /extending/. > >WDYT? I think that David Kastrup is working like crazy to make #{ #} work very well. Before we give up and put an arbitrary restriction, we ought to give him a chance to see if he can solve the problem. If he can't, I support your proposal. But I expect that he will identify and fix the problem. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel