Re: define-void-function or define-procedure ?

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:14:26PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> An afterthought, however: we do have an inordinate amount of user-level
> commands that need to be called from Scheme rather than with Lilypond
> syntax.  That does not make sense.  Void music functions have been
> around for eternities, just a bit inconvenient to define, but reasonably
> documented.
> 
> Maybe we need a user interface meister that tries to maintain a bit of
> coherency and sanity when new features get added.

I've been looking for one since mid-2008.  Don't hold your breath.
I think the best chance for this is GLISS.

Cheers,
- Graham