Re: Invisible notes, Scheme contexts

[Jonatan Liljedahl]

On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 12:59:00 +0100
Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:

> Erik Sandberg wrote:
> >>I can't figure out how to convert between Scheme strings and the
> >>lilypond-native things that look like strings but seem to be
> >>something else (often a LYRICS_STRING, though not in this case).
> > 
> > 
> > functions can only take scheme strings as parameters
> > (\bar and other commands aren't generic functions, they are
> > hardcoded commands; that's why a different syntax is allowed)
> 
> I wonder whether this should be changed too. This would mean that
> 
>    \clef alto
>    \clef "alto"
> 
> becomes
> 
>    \clef #"alto"
> 
> or
> 
>    \clef #'alto
> 
> This will simplify the syntax a bit, at the expense ease of entry.
> 
> What do you think?

I think that would be good. One of the confusing things with lilypond
is the mixture of context properties, grob properties, builtin commands
and scheme functions, etc... In this particular case, alto is clearly a
symbol and should be written 'alto in scheme and thus #'alto in
lilypond, imo.

/Jonatan    -=( http://kymatica.com )=-