Kieren MacMillan <kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> writes:
> Hi David,
>
>> "horn1" = { ... }
>> \"horn1"
>> already works
>
> I toyed with that, but was/am not a big fan of the quotes.
>
>> and keeps the stuff in different variables.
>
> Hmmm… Maybe I’m misunderstanding. I thought this new feature would allow one
> to write
>
> horn.1 = { c d }
> horn.2 = { e f }
> …
> horn.8 = { c’ d’ }
>
> and then access them like
>
> <<
> \new Staff \horn.1
> \new Staff \horn.2
> >>
>
> Did I misunderstand?
No. But it clumps everything together in one alist named \horn . If
you want to access this from Scheme, you cannot write #horn.1 but need
to use #(assoc-ref horn 1) instead. That's different from \"horn1" and
\horn-I which map to #horn1 and #horn-I respectively.
For writing a loop, \horn.1 may be nicer.
> I was/am hoping for a cleaner solution, and thought this feature was
> one.
It's not a naming feature but a data structuring feature. It's easy to
ignore that difference, however, and for quite a few use cases the
resulting cost will be negligible. assoc-ref running through an alist
of 100 elements is still going to be much cheaper than typesetting even
a single note.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
