2017-03-15 0:30 GMT+01:00 Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com>: > 2017-03-15 0:17 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >> Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> 2017-03-14 23:53 GMT+01:00 Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com>: >>>> 2017-03-12 15:52 GMT+01:00 Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> >>>> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% >>>> scheme-engraver.ly >>>> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% >>>> >>>> $ lilypond-git-guile-2.2 scheme-engraver.ly >>>> GNU LilyPond 2.19.57 >>>> Processing `scheme-engraver.ly' >>>> Parsing... >>>> Interpreting music...Passing a number to format as the port is deprecated. >>>> Pass (current-error-port) instead. >>>> [...] >>>> Success: compilation successfully completed >>> >>> >>> I guess this may be fixed pretty easily by replacing all instancies of >>> (format 1 ...) >>> with >>> (format #t ...) >> >> Wouldn't that be (current-output-port) rather than (current-error-port) ? > > > Tbh, I didn't research what (format 1 ...) was supposed to mean. > Though as a user I would want to see the output in terminal, which is > the default (current-output-port), afaik. Thus I suggest format #t. > Am I wrong?
Otoh, (current-error-port) defaults to terminal as well, afaict. -Harm _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
