Am Dienstag, den 14.01.2020, 17:20 -0800 schrieb Aaron Hill:
> On 2020-01-14 5:11 pm, Arle Lommel wrote:
> > Is that feature explained anywhere in the documentation? I don’t
> > recall seeing anything like that anywhere and searching for
> > “quasi-quote scheme Lilypond” doesn’t return anything rel
On 2020-01-14 5:11 pm, Arle Lommel wrote:
Is that feature explained anywhere in the documentation? I don’t
recall seeing anything like that anywhere and searching for
“quasi-quote scheme Lilypond” doesn’t return anything relevant.
If it isn’t there, this seems like rather a nice thing to have in
> Since you have a variable, you would need the quasi-quote feature if you
> wanted the shorthand: `(,padding . 0) But, (cons padding 0) should
> work.
>
>
> -- Aaron Hill
Thank you, Aaron. The quasi-quote version did it.
Is that feature explained anywhere in the documentation? I don’t recal
On 2020-01-14 5:01 pm, Arle Lommel wrote:
I am a total neophyte to Scheme, but not to coding. I’ve written a
simple function, but it does not work (I’ve reduced it to just the
problematic lines. Can anyone tell me how to write the line indicated
below?
shifter =
#(define-music-function
(parser
Am Mo., 4. Nov. 2019 um 01:05 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > lets say I've a list of sublists like '((1 2 3)(4 5 6))
> > I want to modify it, the result should be '((1 3 5)(2 4 6))
> >
> > This is a matrix-operation (not sure whether matrix is the correct
>
Thomas Morley writes:
> Hi,
>
> lets say I've a list of sublists like '((1 2 3)(4 5 6))
> I want to modify it, the result should be '((1 3 5)(2 4 6))
>
> This is a matrix-operation (not sure whether matrix is the correct
> english term), on could write it graphically:
> 1 2 3
> 4 5 6
> ->
> 1 3 5
Stefano,
That works perfectly. The Cond conditional is even better.
Thank you,
Jay
--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypon
Hi Jay, your 'if' statements are not nested properly. See:
#(define nameold
(if (equal? pitch "C")
nameCpitch
(if (equal? pitch "E")
nameEpitch
(if (equal? pitch "G")
nameGpitch
(if (equal? pitch "A")
nameApitc
Hi David,
Am Di., 23. Apr. 2019 um 04:12 Uhr schrieb David Pirotte :
> ...
> > Now `core-guile-condition´ feels like a case for `match´, but I
> > couldn't make it work.
> > Is this a bad use case and alist searching is always preferable?
>
> I would do this:
[...]
regarding your code, it's all o
Hello THomas,
> ...
> Now `core-guile-condition´ feels like a case for `match´, but I
> couldn't make it work.
> Is this a bad use case and alist searching is always preferable?
I would do this:
(define (is-spanner? grob)
(match grob
((g-key . g-vals)
(let ((meta (assq-ref g-vals 'met
Am So., 21. Apr. 2019 um 23:51 Uhr schrieb David Pirotte :
> > Whether 'pattern matching' will be useful to hide complexity to make
> > life easier for our users or whether it adds an abstraction layer,
> > which would make it even harder for users to write their own
> > guile-code, I can't judge
Hi Thomas,
> ...
> Thanks again!
You're welcome.
I used 'funny' (weird) procedure and variable names, but if the procedure is to
be
exposed to your users, and with the objective of making it simple to use, read
and
maintain, as you described later in your answer, you could write it as - using
Am So., 21. Apr. 2019 um 02:34 Uhr schrieb David Pirotte :
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> > ...
> > Thanks pointing me to this possibility, in my use-case I then could do:
> > (define (p) (cons '(1 2 3) '(4 5 6)))
> > (define l1 '(a b c))
> > (define l2 '(x y z))
> > (cons* l1 l2 (car (p)) (cdr (p)) '())
> > =
Hi Thomas,
> ...
> Thanks pointing me to this possibility, in my use-case I then could do:
> (define (p) (cons '(1 2 3) '(4 5 6)))
> (define l1 '(a b c))
> (define l2 '(x y z))
> (cons* l1 l2 (car (p)) (cdr (p)) '())
> =>
> ((a b c) (x y z) (1 2 3) (4 5 6))
Yes, if you can (you mentioned the co
Hi David,
Am Sa., 20. Apr. 2019 um 03:52 Uhr schrieb David Pirotte :
>
> Hi again,
>
> Replying twice to myself in a row, how is that :)
> A little tired I guess ...
>
> > > Note that the above will only work if the last 'blue item' has 3
> > > elements, you'd
> > > need to adapt
Hi again,
Replying twice to myself in a row, how is that :)
A little tired I guess ...
> > Note that the above will only work if the last 'blue item' has 3 elements,
> > you'd
> > need to adapt for other use case (which also 'speak' in favor of the cleaner
> > approach.
> Actu
Hi again,
> Note that the above will only work if the last 'blue item' has 3 elements,
> you'd
> need to adapt for other use case (which also 'speak' in favor of the cleaner
> approach.
Actually, I didn't like what I wrote, here is a slightly better code:
(use-modules (ice-9 match))
(define (b
Hi Thomas,
> Failing example:
> (map
> car
> (cons '(a b c) (cons '(1 2 3) '(x y z
> One way to make it work is to convert the initial pair (cons '(1 2 3)
> '(x y z)) to a list of lists, i.e (cons '(1 2 3) (list '(x y z)))
> The question is: is it the only and/or best way?
It sounds a lo
Am Fr., 19. Apr. 2019 um 17:09 Uhr schrieb Malte Meyn :
>
>
>
> Am 19.04.19 um 16:35 schrieb Thomas Morley:
> > I could do
> > (cons '(a b c) (list (car (list-pair)) (cdr (list-pair
> > and to get the last list: (last ...)
> > Looksy clumsy, though.
> >
> > Any better method?
>
> I’m not sure w
Am 19.04.19 um 16:35 schrieb Thomas Morley:
I could do
(cons '(a b c) (list (car (list-pair)) (cdr (list-pair
and to get the last list: (last ...)
Looksy clumsy, though.
Any better method?
I’m not sure what you want to do here. But maybe it would be easier to
convert the pair of lists t
Thanks a lot, Harm, and a happy musical year to everybody!
Envoyé de mon iPhone
> Le 26 déc. 2018 à 00:13, Thomas Morley a écrit :
>
>> Am Di., 25. Dez. 2018 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Jacques Menu
>> :
>>
>> Hello folks,
>>
>> I don’t succeed in using ‘#:concat’ to compute the second argument to
Am Di., 25. Dez. 2018 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Jacques Menu :
>
> Hello folks,
>
> I don’t succeed in using ‘#:concat’ to compute the second argument to
> ‘#(:note’ in the following Scheme code, where HERE occurs.
>
> What should I use instead? The aim is to use half the value of ‘den’ instead
> of 4
2017-09-17 0:29 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
>> 2017-09-16 22:20 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
>>> Thomas Morley writes:
>>>
Hi all,
what's the best (less expensive) method to insert elements only at the
head of a list and between first and second element of
Thomas Morley writes:
> 2017-09-16 22:20 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
>> Thomas Morley writes:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> what's the best (less expensive) method to insert elements only at the
>>> head of a list and between first and second element of said list.
>>> But don't insert an element at list-
2017-09-16 22:20 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup :
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> what's the best (less expensive) method to insert elements only at the
>> head of a list and between first and second element of said list.
>> But don't insert an element at list-end if the list is of length 1.
>
Thomas Morley writes:
> Hi all,
>
> what's the best (less expensive) method to insert elements only at the
> head of a list and between first and second element of said list.
> But don't insert an element at list-end if the list is of length 1.
>
> I do have:
>
> (define (list-insert-first-and-th
Hi Steven,
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Steven Weber wrote:
> Is there any way to get the context from a grob?
Not that I know of.
> Or is there another way to
> get the current bar number from a grob?
Yes, you can do this using the function grob::rhythmic-location which
will return a pair
Hello David N. and Andrew,
Great, all your suggestions are of some use to me.
Thanks!
JM
> Le 17 nov. 2015 à 14:19, Andrew Bernard a écrit :
>
> Hi Jacques,
>
> You could base a solution on this approach:
>
> c'1 -\markup {
> \column {
> \column {
> #(str
Hi Jacques,
You could base a solution on this approach:
c'1 -\markup {
\column {
\column {
#(string-append
"commllen = "
(string-concatenate (map number->string '(1 2
}
}
Jacques,
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 6:32 AM, Jacques Menu wrote:
> Message says that #(string-append… is not a markup.
>
> > Le 17 nov. 2015 à 13:31, Jacques Menu a écrit :
> >
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > I’ve tried to integrate such a pure Scheme function:
> >
> >
> > guile> (define (function arg)
>
Message says that #(string-append… is not a markup.
> Le 17 nov. 2015 à 13:31, Jacques Menu a écrit :
>
> Hello folks,
>
> I’ve tried to integrate such a pure Scheme function:
>
>
> guile> (define (function arg)
> (if (and (integer? (car arg)) (integer? (cdr arg)))
> (iota (1+ (interv
Hello folks,
I’ve tried to integrate such a pure Scheme function:
guile> (define (function arg)
(if (and (integer? (car arg)) (integer? (cdr arg)))
(iota (1+ (interval-length arg)) (car arg) 1)
)
)
guile> (function '(3 . 7))
(3 4 5 6 7)
as part of a markup, but to no avail.
Hi Simon,
Fellow listers have posted many answers while I was cooking up this one. All
good!
(use-modules (srfi srfi-1))
(define (range r)
(let ((start (car r))
(end (cdr r)))
(iota (+ (- end start) 1) start 1)))
That’s pure Scheme of course. Thomas Morley’s answer is
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Simon Albrecht
wrote:
> On 16.11.2015 22:20, Thomas Morley wrote:
>
>> (define (foo pair)
>>(if (and (integer? (car pair)) (integer? (cdr pair)))
>>(iota (1+ (interval-length pair)) (car pair) 1))
>>#f)
>>
>> (foo '(3 . 7))
>> --> (3 4 5 6 7)
>
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 5:33 PM, David Nalesnik
wrote:
>
>> If not, something like this would work:
>>
>
(for all cases)
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 5:24 PM, David Nalesnik
wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Simon Albrecht
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but an
>> example will make it clear immediately.
>> I want to write a scheme proc
Hi Simon,
On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Simon Albrecht
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but an
> example will make it clear immediately.
> I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7) and
> returns a list with all
2015-11-15 19:53 GMT+01:00 Simon Albrecht :
> Hello,
>
> The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but an
> example will make it clear immediately.
> I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7) and
> returns a list with all the numbers in the range
Simon Albrecht writes:
> The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but
> an example will make it clear immediately.
> I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7)
> and returns a list with all the numbers in the range: #'(3 4 5 6 7)
> How is this d
On 16.11.2015 23:30, pls wrote:
Simon Albrecht writes:
The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but
an example will make it clear immediately.
I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7)
and returns a list with all the numbers in the range: #'
On 16.11.2015 22:20, Thomas Morley wrote:
(define (foo pair)
(if (and (integer? (car pair)) (integer? (cdr pair)))
(iota (1+ (interval-length pair)) (car pair) 1))
#f)
(foo '(3 . 7))
--> (3 4 5 6 7)
An equally good solution.
Thank you, Simon
__
On 16.11.2015 21:59, David Kastrup wrote:
Simon Albrecht writes:
Hello,
The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but
an example will make it clear immediately.
I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7)
and returns a list with all the numbe
(iota 7 3)
Am 15.11.2015 um 19:53 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
> Hello,
>
> The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but
> an example will make it clear immediately.
> I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7)
> and returns a list with all the numbe
Simon Albrecht writes:
> Hello,
>
> The subject certainly seems cryptic – it’s difficult to summarize, but
> an example will make it clear immediately.
> I want to write a scheme procedure, which takes a pair like #'(3 . 7)
> and returns a list with all the numbers in the range: #'(3 4 5 6 7)
> H
Carl Sorensen-3 wrote:
>
> It is possible to determine the current time signature from the Timing
> context using the timeSignatureFraction property.
>
> However, this is difficult to do in a music function, because the music
> function does not have a context available.
>
> You'll need to use
Carl Sorensen-3 wrote:
>
> It is possible to determine the current time signature from the Timing
> context using the timeSignatureFraction property.
>
> However, this is difficult to do in a music function, because the music
> function does not have a context available.
>
> You'll need to use
On 3/9/11 12:22 PM, "TaoCG" wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> is it possible to determine the current time signature with scheme?
> I would like to alter the functions from this snippet so that the length of
> the produced rest equals the denominator and that $count equals the
> nominator.
> http://lsr.dsi
Am Samstag, 5. Dezember 2009 01:42:16 schrieb Robin Bannister:
> Aaron Dalton wrote:
> > I want to be able to hide the accidental.
>
> There is Mark Polesky's suppress-accidental
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-07/msg00384.html
> but that is probably overkill in your case.
Aaron Dalton wrote:
I want to be able to hide the accidental.
There is Mark Polesky's suppress-accidental
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-07/msg00384.html
but that is probably overkill in your case.
You can do it by switching the style in a music function
http://lilypo
Roman Stawski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Take a look at http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=493
Nice!
Is there a way to get rid of the "warning: no such internal option:
target"?
> This lets you have constructs such as
>
> \ifTargetIn #'(foo) {
> ...
> }
A limitation is that it wor
Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hmm. I guess I don't quite understand what you were asking; I
> can't see why \tag wouldn't work.
Using \tag requires that all the variables are defined, and the
variables that need (not) to be processed must get a tag.
leadWords = \lyricmode { S
Johan
This is the sort of thing I was playing with earlier on this year.
Take a look at http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?u=1&id=493
This lets you have constructs such as
\ifTargetIn #'(foo) {
...
}
In this case the symbols are switched on/off on the command-line but you
could always change
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 11:47:04PM +0100, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:28:37PM +0100, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > > What I'm trying to achieve is to have input lines processed
> > > selectively based on whether certain symbols are
Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:28:37PM +0100, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > What I'm trying to achieve is to have input lines processed
> > selectively based on whether certain symbols are defined.
>
> Umm, use \tag?
I use this for other purposes:
allMusic
Nicolas Sceaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> A more idiomatic way to do it:
Nice. This gives me the following snippet:
% \ifDefined #'symbol
% Returns the music expression defined by symbol,
% or a void expression if symbol has not been defined.
ifDefined =
#(define-music-function (par
Le 12 nov. 08 à 05:48, Carl Sorensen a écrit :
Johan Vromans squirrel.nl> writes:
Stupic question, I assume...
In a scheme function I have a symbol that is the name of a lilypond
expression. How can I get its music value?
E.g.
ifDefined =
#(define-music-function
(parser location sym)
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 05:28:37PM +0100, Johan Vromans wrote:
> What I'm trying to achieve is to have input lines processed
> selectively based on whether certain symbols are defined.
Umm, use \tag? See "different editions from one source" in NR 3.
Cheers,
- Graham
__
Johan Vromans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Stay tuned, it'll get even better...
If it would only work...
What I'm trying to achieve is to have input lines processed
selectively based on whether certain symbols are defined.
For example, I have a file "highstaff.ly":
\new Staff = High <<
Mark Polesky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Wow! Someone should add this to the LSR!
Stay tuned, it'll get even better...
-- Johan
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Wow! Someone should add this to the LSR!
- Mark
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Carl Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You need to use the procedure primitive-eval to evaluate a symbol
YES! That's the trick.
Thanks!
-- Johan
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-
Johan Vromans squirrel.nl> writes:
>
> Stupic question, I assume...
>
> In a scheme function I have a symbol that is the name of a lilypond
> expression. How can I get its music value?
>
> E.g.
>
> ifDefined =
> #(define-music-function
>(parser location sym)
>(symbol?)
>
>(if
OK, I found a very good code on the french mailing list, still not perfect
but it's a big step forward!
===
\version "2.11.*"
str = #(define-music-function (parser location str music) (string?
ly:music?)
(let ((sp
Le 3 nov. 07 à 00:00, Steven Weber a écrit :
I need a function that takes 7 parameters. My function works fine
as long as there are only 3 parameters – as soon as I add the
fourth, everything blows up, with the following error:
programming error: no parser tag defined for this markup sign
Hello,
As regards the issue of context-free equivalence --
> > I can say
> >
> >foo = \markup { \bold "Zanzibar" }
> >bar = \markup { "Stand on" \foo }
> >
> > but I can't say
> >
> >bar = \markup { "Stand on" \markup { \bold "Zanzibar" } }
> >
> > [so]
> >
> >\foo is not equiv
On Thursday 30 November 2006 21:32, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > . . . one problem is that this [giving the syntax of each keyword] would
> > still just tell a small part of the full syntax.
>
> I think it would give a big part of the full syntax, even if not the whole
> picture. It wou
Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mats Bengtsson escreveu:
>
>> As already said, this is not available in the current manual and one
>> problem is that
>> this would still just tell a small part of the full syntax. Another
>
> This should be rather easy to add to the manual. I believe
Mats Bengtsson escreveu:
>> OK, thank you, that's very clear. That fact, for any given keyword,
>> would tell a user immediately whether (s)he could just write a macro or
>> would be forced to define a function for some expression involving the
>> keyword.
>>
>> Is the information
>>(1) numbe
Hello,
> . . . one problem is that this [giving the syntax of each keyword] would
> still just tell a small part of the full syntax.
I think it would give a big part of the full syntax, even if not the whole
picture. It would enable a user to know
(1) what type of "arguments" have to follow
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
It may help your understanding to know
that \tweak itself is implemented as a music function taking 3 arguments.
The syntax of \tweak is
\tweak symbol value music_expression
OK, thank you, that's very clear. That fact, for any given keywor
In my understanding, the difference between \override and \tweak is
that with \override, you can only specify the "time" at which the setting
should be active, i.e. if you have several notes or whatever that appear
simultaneous within the same context, then you can not affect them
individually,
j
Hello,
> It may help your understanding to know
> that \tweak itself is implemented as a music function taking 3 arguments.
> The syntax of \tweak is
> \tweak symbol value music_expression
OK, thank you, that's very clear. That fact, for any given keyword,
would tell a user immediately whether
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
No, this doesn't work.
OK, but I have a question. It is common to write such things as
push = \once \over
Hello,
> > Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
> >
> > fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
> No, this doesn't work.
OK, but I have a question. It is common to write such things as
push = \once \override NoteColumn #'extra-X-extent = #'
On 11/29/06, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
No, this doesn't work.
What does work is
\version "2.10.0"
fraction = #(define-music-function (parser location music) (ly:music?)
#{
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text $music
#})
This is exactly what I was
Mats Bengtsson wrote:
However, what is the reason to use \tweak at all? Why not simply do
an ordinary \once \override:
\version "2.10.0"
fraction = \override TupletNumber #'text =
#tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
Sorry, this should of course be
fraction = \once \override TupletNumber #'te
No, this doesn't work.
What does work is
\version "2.10.0"
fraction = #(define-music-function (parser location music) (ly:music?)
#{
\tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text $music
#})
\relative c'{
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
}
Howeve
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
[...]
Are you sure that you want to overwrite LilyPond's `\fraction'
function?
??? Are you thinking of the \fraction markup command? In
> Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
>
> fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
>
> [...]
Are you sure that you want to overwrite LilyPond's `\fraction'
function?
Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing
Hello,
Does it work just to define this macro at the top level
fraction = \tweak #'text #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
and then later in the music to write
\fraction
\times 2/3 {
c'8 c'8 c'8
}
Does LilyPond swallow that?
-- Tom
---
Eduardo Vieira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I don't know why this e-mail didn't make it to the Lilypond list, but,
anyhow, have you ever checked the program FOMUS
(http://common-lisp.net/project/fomus/doc/)? If you think of
algorithimic composition and working with Lisp and Scheme, that might
Rick Hansen (aka RickH) schreef:
Thanks, so line-width will take whatever is left over after the margins are
set and the paper size established?
yes.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
LilyPond Software Design
-- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilyp
Thanks, so line-width will take whatever is left over after the margins are
set and the paper size established?
Han-Wen Nienhuys-2 wrote:
>
> Rick Hansen (aka RickH) schreef:
>> I would like to "dynamically generate" values for the following 3
>> hard-coded
>> properties based on a rule, and
Rick Hansen (aka RickH) schreef:
I would like to "dynamically generate" values for the following 3 hard-coded
properties based on a rule, and the current default paper size, but I dont
know scheme:
paper-height = 11.0\in
paper-width = 8.5\in
line-width = 7.7\in
So basica
Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Quoting Marcus Macauley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
mypitch = #0
#(define mypitch 0)
One of them is enough!
That's why I said I "put one of these lines at the beginning of the file".
When I got the error, I tried defining the variable in Scheme (second line
above) instead
Quoting Marcus Macauley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
mypitch = #0
#(define mypitch 0)
One of them is enough!
and then change the expression:
(ly:make-pitch 1 0 0)
to:
(ly:make-pitch 1 $mypitch 0)
but when I do that, it complains:
"ERROR: Unbound variable: $mypitch"
Did you try to remove the "$"?
86 matches
Mail list logo
