Re: Basic function question

[Dmytro O. Redchuk]

On Tue 26 Jul 2011, 11:39 Urs Liska wrote:
> Am 26.07.2011 11:28, schrieb Dmytro O. Redchuk:
> >So (if so), you need to define markup function.
> >
> >#(define-markup-command (instr layout props what) (markup?)
> >   (interpret-markup layout props
> >     (markup #:bold #:italic #:huge what)))
> >
> >(not tested thougth).
> >
> Well this works. This is a solution I had also found in the docs.
> 
> So it seems it is not possible to _use_ functions the way I had wanted?
> I have always either to use a markup function (and write "\markup")
> or to first write the function name and provide the note as an argument.
> Is that correct?
Actually I don't know why _markup function_ behaves like this.

Docs*) says:

%----------------------------8<----------------------------------
The markup macro builds markup expressions in Scheme while providing a
LilyPond-like syntax. For example,

    (markup #:column (#:line (#:bold #:italic "hello" #:raise 0.4 "world")
                          #:larger #:line ("foo" "bar" "baz")))

is equivalent to:

    \markup \column { \line { \bold \italic "hello" \raise #0.4 "world" }
                      \larger \line { foo bar baz } }
%----------------------------8<----------------------------------

But is that really equivalent? Why markup function should (shouldn't it?) be
preceeded with \markup ?

I don't know actually. Sorry.

_____________________
 * 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/extending/markup-construction-in-scheme

-- 
  Dmytro O. Redchuk                        "Easy to use" is easy to say.
  Bug Squad                                             -- Jeff Garbers