[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph)
From: |
Thomas Morley |
Subject: |
Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph) |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Oct 2018 01:18:18 +0200 |
Hi Urs,
Am Sa., 13. Okt. 2018 um 00:00 Uhr schrieb Urs Liska <address@hidden>:
> > %% Not sure if needed, though, better be paranoid and work on a copy of
> > %% default-script-alist to avoid possible bleed-over.
> > #(define my-script-alist default-script-alist)
>
> Except that this doesn't *create* a copy but only a reference, isn't it?
> So your changes to my-script-alist also affect default-script-alist.
Well, if I add
#(pretty-print
(lset-difference
equal?
my-script-alist
default-script-alist))
at the end of my file, I get:
(("path"
(avoid-slur . inside)
(padding . 0.5)
(stencil . #<procedure my-path-stil (grob)>)
(side-relative-direction . -1))
("polygon"
(avoid-slur . inside)
(padding . 0.5)
(stencil . #<procedure my-polygon-stil (grob)>)
(side-relative-direction . -1)))
If default script-alist would be changed as well, then the result should be '().
Or am I thinking wrongly?
Cheers,
Harm
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Thomas Morley, 2018/10/12
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Urs Liska, 2018/10/12
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph),
Thomas Morley <=
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Urs Liska, 2018/10/13
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Aaron Hill, 2018/10/13
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Aaron Hill, 2018/10/13
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Urs Liska, 2018/10/13
- Re: Define new articulation with markup or path (instead of glyph), Trevor Bača, 2018/10/17