Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Am 06.06.2013 13:35, schrieb David Kastrup:
>
>>> Putting an "item" of type symbol-list-or-music? last seems like a
>>> reasonably good idea.
>> Hm, I think I see what you mean,
>> but if I write
>>
>> annotate =
>>
>> #(define-void-function (parser location type properties annotation item)
>>
>>    (string? list? string? symbol-list-or-music?))

>> I get an error "Zu viel Vorgriff" (too much read-ahead?).
>> If I replace 'Script' with '{ c }' for example it compiles without message.
>> ???
>
> And if you do
>
> annotate =
> #(define-music-function (parser location type properties annotation item)
>
>    (string? list? string? symbol-list-or-music?) #{ #})
>
> it also compiles fine (which explains why \shape does not blow up around
> our ears).
>
> Looks like I have something more to fix in the parser...

Stupid question: independent of me fixing this, wouldn't your function
actually be supposed to return some music expression anyway?  If so,
using a music function defined as #{ #} for the testing phase should be
sufficient for avoiding this parser problem.

-- 
David Kastrup