Re: modular "markup" and arguments

[David Kastrup]

Bric <address@hidden> writes:

> Development is moving insanely fast here. I just compiled 2.17.29, and
> there's already 2.17.95

Which is the next release after 2.17.29.  We are getting close to
releasing 2.18, and the versioning reflects that.

> I guess I need to build the latest frescobaldi, locally(?), so it's in
> step with the latest lilypond?

Frescobaldi is an editor.  Some of its special previewing functionality
might require newer versions of LilyPond, and some of its syntax
highlighting might get confused by large jumps in versions, but its
fundamental operation does not get between user and LilyPond.  So "being
in step" should not be of much importance.

> So, obviously, just to add a "^markup" to the music function is not
> trivial.  I'm gathering that (text) markup belongs to an "event
> function", rather than a "music function", and the two can't be
> integrated ... although, that doesn't sound likely, off the top of my
> head, given the power and flexibility of this environment.

Markups can't be added to general music expressions (what would
<< c1 \\ d2 >>^"hi" even mean?).  But in this case you can just attach
it to an empty chord starting with the music expression, like
<>^"markup text  #the-music  ...

-- 
David Kastrup