thomasmorle...@gmail.com writes: > Reviewers: , > > Message: > Please review. > Instead of simply replacing 1 by (current-error-port) a variable for the > port could have been used probably. > Opinions?
current-error-port is a built-in function. Calling it and referencing a variable are not likely recognizably different in their cost. So I wouldn't bother. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
