Re: My own wishlist...

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

address@hidden writes:
> A cheap functionality, which would prove very useful in
> practice, would be the ability to declare Lilypond stuff
> in scheme, as in:
> 
>       (map myfunc {\notes { a b c d | a b c d}})
> 
> which would be equivalent to:
> 
>       tempvar0981 = \notes { a b c d | a b c d}
> 
>       (map myfunc tempvar0981)
> 
> Since we already have the ability to declare 
> Scheme stuff within LilyPond, allowing for the
> reverse might be enough for most applications....
> 
> Is this just nonsense, or is this reasonable to implement
> (I don't know whether one can plug language extensions in
> GUILE...) ?

I don't know how it can be done. Perhaps our Scheme macro expert can
chip in some ideas. Nicolas?

In the meantime, you can achieve the same thing  with apply, albeit a
little more verbose

\apply #(lambda (m)
  ..more stuff.. )
  \notes { a b c d | a b c d}


-- 

 Han-Wen Nienhuys   |   address@hidden   |   http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen