Re: function does not replicate \markup?

[David Kastrup]

"address@hidden" <address@hidden> writes:

> On 2012-06-24 05:43, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Because it is a rehearsal mark rather than a text script? 
> This makes sense! I tried to use TextScript but it didn't work.
>
> fN = #(define-music-function (parser location fretp ) (string?)
>
>        #{
>
>          \once \override TextScript #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT
>
>         \once \override TextScript #'direction = #DOWN
>
>          \mark \markup  { \box \italic \small  $fretp }
>
>        #}
>
>        )

You make overrides for a TextScript but still use a mark here.

>> If you write the contents of the music function in the file rather 
>> than a text script
> I'm sorry but I don't understand what you are saying? Could you possibly 
> make a code sample

"contents of the music function" is everything between #{ ... #}, and if
you copy this into your file instead of \fn, it will look just like the
result of the function.  That is, the function works fine and quite as
intended for replacing a mark with a mark expressed in a different
manner, namely by routing it through a music function.  However, you are
replacing a textscript with a mark, which is something quite different,
and also looking different in input, and documented differently.

>> Try to see whether you can convince your mail client to include code 
>> without removing its indentation and double-spacing the lines. Makes 
>> it easier to talk about code. 
> Sorry about this. In the mails I get the code looks OK.
> I hope that the code above is looking Ok. If not please let me know and 
> I try something different.

Still double-spaced.

Anyway, you ask why different things look different.  It is because they
are different things.  There is not really more to it than that.  The
real question is why this poses a problem for you, and what it is you
are actually trying to achieve.

-- 
David Kastrup