Re: Problem with remove bar number/ why I'm not upgrading to the new stable version

[Janek Warchoł]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:13 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> LilyPond is supposed to
> be useful without having to extend it.
>
>> In other words, an a-priori refusal of Scheme isn't helpful if you
>> want to explore the capabilities of LilyPond.
>
> If you want to _extend_ them.  LilyPond is nowhere near the state where
> every imaginable music typesetting task is available as a turnkey
> solution.  But that does not mean having to use Scheme is an ideal or a
> goal for LilyPond.
>
> Many houseowners get along without doing masonry themselves.

+1

> Our Scheme introductions are not really much more than a cursory
> introduction.  Explaining the concepts of Scheme exhaustively would be
> beyond the LilyPond manuals.
>
> Its purpose is mostly getting people's feet wet enough that they don't
> see the point in putting their socks back on.
>
> It would seem that we need to do a bit more splashing before this works
> reliably.

:)

cheers,
Janek