Re: Lower-case letter rehearsal marks

[Thomas Morley]

2015-12-11 11:50 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:

>> Having
>> \markup bold-red = <ẃhat-ever>
>> ,i.e. a definition might lead to confusions.
>
> The compiler isn't confused.  The question is more about the user.

Yep, that was exactly my concern.

>> Is it possible to create a sort-of-markup-macro to be used like:
>>
>> \sort-of-markup-macro sort-of-markup-macro-name = <whatever>
>>
>> instead?
>> (Just brain-storming)
>
> Uh, that went over my head.  Care to elaborate?  I cannot really fit the
> wildcard pieces here.

Well, still only brain-storming ...

(1) A step in my past

I remember as a starter with LilyPond I was a little confused that we
had a plethora of things like:

nameI = <somethingI>
nameII = <somethingII>
nameIII = <somethingIII>

Where <somethingWhatever> was a quite simple expression or a
music-function or ...

But markup-commands were different.
There was some define-thing then as argument the name and others.
(nowadays I could probably describe this a little better, but I'm
trying to recall my starter-thoughts).

And it lasted some time to sort it all.

(2) Your proposal: \markup bold-red = \bold \with-color #red \etc

If I'm not mistaken then this would define a valid markup-command with
the name 'bold-red.
In general it would allow to newly define markup-commands using
preexisting ones in an easy and userfriendly way.

Though, I thought about some sort of macro, doing the job like:

%% the macro:
\simple-define-markup-command
%% the args:
  % name:
  bold-red
  % body:
  \bold \with-color #red \etc

I think it would prevent some confusions.
Though it omitts the "="-sign, no idea whether it's possible or desirable.


Cheers,
  Harm