lilypondbook package useful?

[Urs Liska]

Hi list,

I'm just starting my first try with lilypond-book.





If I didn't miss something, I will try to use the following workaround:

 * Write a .sty file containing latex definitions corresponding to the
   command recognized by lilypond-book.
 * When latex compiles the file it will then print the source code and
   a comment instead



Am I on the right track with this approach?
Or is there something wrong with it?
Or did I miss something, and there is already a solution?






Wouldn't the following work:

 * lilypond-book processes the original latex file as usual,
   but writes an additional parameter (the path to the generated image)
   _into the original file_ (instead of creating a new file).
 * A latex package contains environments/commands corresponding to
   those understood by lilypond-book
 * If that additional parameter is present, it includes the image file,
 * otherwise it prints the source code verbatim.

????



Thanks for any opinions
Urs


\NeedsTeXFormat{LaTeX2e}
\ProvidesPackage{lilypondbook}

\RequirePackage{verbatim}
\newenvironment{lilypond}{%

\medskip
\hrule
\medskip
\noindent
\textit{LilyPond example, to be processed with lilypond-book:}
	\verbatim
}
{
	\endverbatim
	
	\hrule
	\medskip
}

I see that I have to enter the code in my latex document, process this document with lilypond-book and then compile the resulting file to get my final pdf document. But do I see correctly that I can't compile my original file with latex anymore (because of the undefined environment/command)? I find this inacceptable, because I want to be able to compile my original document at any time during its development. Attached you'll find a first sketch for the 'lilypond' environment (.sty file, test .tex file and pdf). If you think that's a good idea I will complete it and suggest it as an enhancement to be distributed together with lilypond-book. And if it works, I would think about giving them an optional parameter where one can store the path to the file (resulting of a run of lilypond-book), so latex can display either the code or this image if present. And if that works too I'd suggest to update lilypond-book as to insert this additional parameter by itself, so latex would automatically use the generated image. And if I understand all this correctly (but chances are quite high I don't), I would say that this approach could make the intermediate (i.e. processed) .tex file obsolete (at least for latex). Please be patient if I'm completely off the track, but it may also be I'm not ... As lilypond-book is written in Python I might even contribute to that myself.

lilypondbook-test.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{lilypondbook}
\begin{document}
\section*{LilyPond code, compilable through ordinary \LaTeX}

This is a normal paragraph which is followed by a music example.
If I compile the document with \LaTeX, I get:

\begin{lilypond}
music = \relative e'' {
  e16 gis fis e dis cis | %1
  h4 r8 | %2
  e16 gis fis e dis cis | %3
  h4 r8 | %4
}
\end{lilypond}
To get the music example I have to process this via \texttt{lilypond-book}.
\end{document}

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user