Aha! Yes, that works. Now I've been able to go in and the rest of my
markup stuff.
Thanks.
On 10/1/2024 3:12 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Walt North writes:
Thank. well that got me a step farther. However now I see that this works
without curly braces around the \markup...Examples below. I'
Am Mittwoch, 2. Oktober 2024, 00:04:17 MESZ schrieb Walt North:
> title = \markup {#name}
# tells the parser to interpret the following expression as scheme expression.
Scheme does not really care about the symbol }, so if you enter #name} the
parser will interpret the } as part of the symb
Walt North writes:
> Thank. well that got me a step farther. However now I see that this works
> without curly braces around the \markup...Examples below. I'm not that
> familiar with guile so it's probably related to how variables work in
> guile. The end goal is to have a fair amount of templ
7d;}#
C:/Users/waltn/AppData/Local/Temp/frescobaldi-hg83vfc9/tmpix0jvon3/document.ly:8:7
<1>: error: syntax error, unexpected end of input
}
On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 2:23 PM Timothy Lanfear wrote:
> On 01/10/2024 22:06, Walt North wrote:
>
> I may be thinking about define-void-function i
.24.4"
hdr =
#(define-void-function (name) (string?)
(if (not $defaultheader)
(set! $defaultheader #{ \header { } #}))
(module-define! $defaultheader 'title name))
\hdr "test"
%\header { title = test }
\score {
{c4 d e f}
}
This might for example be useful wh
On 01/10/2024 22:06, Walt North wrote:
I may be thinking about define-void-function incorrectly. Here is a
trimmed down example of what I was trying to do. I want to have a
callable function that sets up my \header.
There are other ways I could go about this to get what I want - but I
I may be thinking about define-void-function incorrectly. Here is a
trimmed down example of what I was trying to do. I want to have a
callable function that sets up my \header.
There are other ways I could go about this to get what I want - but I
originally thought this would be easy way to
l
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> \version "2.20.0"
> >>
> >> sum =
> >> #(define-void-function
> >>(args)
> >>(number-list?)
> > I know the the function uses a list for this because of the
> > undetermined
On 2020-05-07 9:42 pm, Freeman Gilmore wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 11:32 PM Aaron Hill
wrote:
\version "2.20.0"
sum =
#(define-void-function
(args)
(number-list?)
I know the the function uses a list for this because of the
undetermined number of args as the lambda pro
4 5) % 14 (from LilyPond Log)
> >
> > I am guessing from reading “Extending LilyPond“ the above could be maid
> > into:
> >
> > function =
> >(define-void-function
> >(arg1 arg2 …)
> >(type1? type2? …)
> > body)
> >
>
=
(define-void-function
(arg1 arg2 …)
(type1? type2? …)
body)
This is one of my many tries: but nothing works:
sum = #(define-void-function (x)
(lambda x
(define A (apply + x))
(display A)))
{\sum 2 3 4}
There are several things going on here.
The lambda construct supports a
Need lots of help this. Starting with this:
sum = #(lambda x
(define A (apply + x))
(display A))
#(sum 2 3 4 5) % 14 (from LilyPond Log)
I am guessing from reading “Extending LilyPond“ the above could be maid into:
function =
(define-void-function
(arg1 arg2 …)
(type1
within a Scheme function. OTOH I can't use the "\include"
approach either because then the file would be interpreted as LilyPond -
which of course fails.
So: Is it possible to load a Scheme module from within a
(define-void-function) ?
Any hint or solution wou
13 matches
Mail list logo
