quot;Application Usage"
> manual,
>
maybe as a first step!
> or something else (a combination?).
>
definitely! I'll think about a possibility (next week)
Eluze
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/internal-LilyPond-functions-instead-of--d-options-tp33107771p33132825.html
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 10:54 AM, -Eluze wrote:
>
> hi
>
> everybody knows how cumbersome it is to write parameters in a shell - it
> would be nice to have them in a lilypond file.
>
> LilyPond provides an alternative for many of the command line options but
> they are not well documented in an ap
ctions to the "Application Usage"
manual.
what do you think of this?
thanks
Eluze
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/internal-LilyPond-functions-instead-of--d-options-tp33107771p33107771.html
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - Bug
