Marc Hohl <m...@hohlart.de> writes:
> Is this a feasible approach? What am I currently doing wrong?
> #(define bar-line-stencil-alist
> '(("|" . thin-stil)
> ("." . thick-stil)
> ("" . empty-stil)
> ))
> (thin-stil (bar-line::simple-bar-line grob hair extent rounded))
> (thick-stil (bar-line::simple-bar-line grob fatline extent rounded))
> (empty-stil (make-filled-box-stencil (cons 0 0) (cons 0 extent)))
> (stencil (assoc-get glyph bar-line-stencil-alist empty-stil))
> )
>
> stencil
> ))
That does not work. stencil is set to a symbol, and that symbol is
never converted to a value. When the function is being executed, the
_symbols_ thin-stil, stick-stil and empty-stil have long lost any
connection with the expressions that they were associated with while the
let-statement was being compiled.
You could write (local-eval stencil (the-environment)) to let the
lexical environment of the function compilation linger over long enough
to make this work, but you would earn a reward for the unnecessarily
most ugly and unstable code imaginable.
Instead, try using a case statement. There is no need to calculate all
stencils and throwing most of them away.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
