Thanks for that hint! I will keep that in mind for future development.
I actually use 2.14 for my allday work and create my extensions according to
that syntax, because I want to be able to produce sheets day by day without
stumbling over suprisingly upcoming changes.
I know, I should have a devel (2.15 ... 2.17 ...) on my machine to be prepared
for the next release.
Paolo's excercise would be solved differently by me: I would use a ly:music?
argument and copy and augment that. And I hope, ly:music? arguments will not be
broken in future releases ;-)
Cheers,
Jan-Peter
Am 11.12.2011 um 09:45 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Jan-Peter Voigt <jp.vo...@gmx.de> writes:
>
>> Hi Paolo,
>>
>> this compiles in 2.14.2 on my machine:
>> --snip--
>> \version "2.14.2"
>>
>> myFunction = #(define-music-function (parser location foobar) (ly:duration?)
>> (make-music 'SequentialMusic 'elements (list
>> (make-music 'EventChord 'elements (list
>> (make-music 'NoteEvent 'duration foobar 'pitch (ly:make-pitch 1 0 0))
>> ))
>> ))
>> )
>>
>> {
>> \myFunction #(ly:make-duration 2 0 1 1) r4
>> }
>
> Yes, it would. Unfortunately, it would not compile with the current
> version since the current version does not allow duration arguments to
> be specified in anything but duration syntax (along with pitches, they
> are one of two currently remaining special-cased argument types).
>
> I really don't think that it is worth investing work into creating 2.14
> sources if you want to have music functions meddling with durations and
> other stuff in easily maintainable ways.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
