Re: Extending \lilypondfile to support separate handling of header fields for use by LaTeX et.al.

[Michael Haynie]

I found and fixed two problems with the LaTeX macros I sent out 
earlier, and revised the hymn song example format to move the copyright 
text to the end of the song.  The fix for header processing is a little 
ugly -- I think there must be a simpler way, but (a) it works, and (b) 
it doesn't materially increase processing time, which is still 
dominated by lilypond proper.

I'm still pretty happy with the mechanism this represents, but for two 
things.

* -Hall to extract every header would be would be tremendously useful. 
Otherwise, I have to extract all of the headers individually, and 
that's *really* tedious.

* markup in header text is not handled well at all.  I'm really not 
certain how to proceed -- the lilypond markup doesn't look much like 
the equivalent LaTeX markup, though some type of parser should be able 
to translate from one form to the other.  It would be easy to write 
such a filter in C/C++, but that would introduce yet another language 
into the mix.  Not a happy thought.  A top-down parser could be 
hand-written, I suppose.

As before, comments are welcome.

lilypondSystemMacros.tex
Description: TeX document

On Dec 29, 2005, at 8:08 AM, Bernard Hurley wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>
> On Tue, 2005-12-27 at 16:45 -0500, Michael Haynie wrote:
> > I had a good look at the proposed alternative mechanism as described 
> > in
> > lilypondmacros.  It mostly worked, but left me with a fair amount of
> > hand editing that would have to be revisited each time I rearranged 
> > the
> > songs in the book -- a *frequent* occurrence when I'm laying out a 
> > book
> > for final printing.  I studied what you did, and I've developed an
> > alternative suggestion, in several parts:
>
> I've been fixing some of the bugs in my code (there were some really
> silly ones like getting the system count wrong) and changing the way it
> works. I will send you a new version soon.  I will also have a look at
> you ideas which look interesting and see how I can take them into
> account. But that will have to be after 3rd Jan as I have a lot of work
> to do by then. Just one thing, since I will be realeasing by stuff 
> under
> GPL 2 or later, could you confirm that your files can be released uner
> this license?
>
> Regards,
>
> Bernard