Am Freitag, 03. April 2015 20:15 CEST, Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org>
schrieb:
>
>
> Am 03.04.2015 um 19:45 schrieb Kevin Barry:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Urs Liska <u...@openlilylib.org
> > <mailto:u...@openlilylib.org>> wrote:
> >
> > I'll note that for explaining in a blog post because it seems like
> > a good example for demonstrating the relation between Scheme and
> > LilyPond variables and the role of symbols.
> >
> > Maybe it fits into a post I've just started to plan (explaining
> > what "#(define-music-function" actually means).
> >
> >
> > I would be very interested to read it. I have figured out over time
> > what kind of things tend to work and which things don't (when it comes
> > to variables and substitution) but I don't always understand why, for
> > example `t = \tuplet' doesn't work, but `#(define t tuplet)' does.
Well, think of it like this (slightly oversimplified):
'tuplet' is a lilypond function, '\' will _call_ this function.
Let's quickly check that:
guile> tuplet
#<Music function #<procedure #f (parser location ratio tuplet-span music)>>
If you do '#(define t tuplet)' 't' will have the same value as 'tuplet':
guile> (define t tuplet)
guile> t
#<Music function #<procedure #f (parser location ratio tuplet-span music)>>
If you write:
t = \tuplet
't' would have the value of calling 'tuplet' .
HTH RalfD
> I've started writing the post today, and it may well be that it fits in.
> But I'll have to figure out if I've understood it fully myself (or if I
> manage to do so during the process of writing ...).
> If it doesn't fit it would also be a good topic for an individual post.
> Nothing bad with having some shorter posts in between ...
>
> Best
> Urs
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
