Am Di., 9. Aug. 2022 um 23:46 Uhr schrieb Jean Abou Samra <j...@abou-samra.fr>: > > Hi, > > Some time ago, Jacques Menu asked on the French-speaking equivalent of > this list if it would be possible to create an infix syntax for Scheme > that would be more approachable for beginners. > > As we discussed this topic privately and he asked me questions about how > a possible implementation could be done, I ended up finding that an > example was easier to give than full explanations, and this gave > "Herescheme": > > https://gitlab.com/jeanas/herescheme/ > > This is a Git repository. You can also download the code as a .zip archive > using the "Download" button, or from this direct link: > > https://gitlab.com/jeanas/herescheme/-/archive/main/herescheme-main.zip > > To use Herescheme, download that, unzip it, and \include the file > "/.../herescheme/herescheme.ily". This requires a 2.23 version of > LilyPond (tested with 2.23.11). > > There are a number of examples in the file herescheme-examples.ly. > Excerpt: > > > \relative c' { > \shape &"[(0, 0), (0, 1.5), (0, 0.4), (0, 0)]" Slur > \override Beam.grow-direction = > &"function(beam) => > let Y_positions = ly.grob_property(beam, |positions|) in > { > ly.message('Beam \\'positions are ~a', Y_positions); > let left_position = car(Y_positions) in > let right_position = cdr(Y_positions) in > if left_position < right_position then { > RIGHT > } > else if left_position > right_position then { > LEFT > } > else if left_position = right_position then { > CENTER > } > else ly.error('this can\\'t happen') > }" > c'16( d e f g f e d c g c g c e g c) > } > > > > This is experimental; comments on it are welcome, but I don't recommend > using it for serious projects yet. > > To be honest, I have no idea if what I did here is actually a good idea > at all (I for one won't use it). I'm just curious to see. On the one hand, > normal Scheme syntax is used in all Scheme tutorials, in the Guile manuals, > on mailing list snippets, and when printing values, so only using Herescheme > syntax without knowing about basic Scheme syntax is likely tough. On the > other hand, I know Scheme is off-putting to some people just because of its > many parentheses and the "unintuitive" way of placing the operator as > prefix. > If that is your case, maybe you'll find Herescheme to your taste. Or maybe > not. > > It is possible to mix Scheme and Herescheme code seamlessly. > > Also, please note that Herescheme is *not* a whole new language. > Don't expect to be able to write something similar to Java or > Python in LilyPond. Herescheme has the same underlying concepts > as Scheme, is just a different syntax for writing Scheme code. > It does have a syntax that is more familiar to people used to > languages other than from the Lisp family. > > Finally, this was just a side project in passing for me, so by > all means do comment, but please don't expect me to update the > code fast. > > Regards, > Jean > >
Do you know WISP by Arne Babenhauserheide https://hg.sr.ht/~arnebab/wisp ? Tbh, I don't like these approaches, though WISP already exists. No need to duplicate efforts, at least it's worth a closer look!? Cheers, Harm
