Re: Discuss signature for new function \annotate

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm interested in 
> - general thoughts on the signature design (as I still lack experience
> with Scheme functions)

> % Plain signature of the function draft
> annotate = 
> #(define-void-function (parser location grob type properties annotation)
>    (string? string? list? string?)
>    )
>
> \relative ges, {
>   \key ges \major
>   \clef bass
>   \time 3/4
>   
>   \repeat tremolo 24 ges32-> -\markup { \dynamic "sfz" } \p \< | 
>   \annotate Script "critremark"
>   #'(("voice" . "vc1")
>      ("source" . "Ms. 2")
>      ("author" . "Urs Liska")
>      ("date" . "2013-06-06"))
>   "Tenuto added as in Vc. 2"

If your first argument is something like Script, you might want to make
it of type symbol? instead.  I actually have a syntax sanitizing patch
in limbo where unquoted words are not accepted as strings.  It is not
going to make it into 2.18, but I don't promise I won't push it at some
later point of time.

It is probably worth considering to make properties of type context-mod?
(potentially optional), then you can write the argument as

\with {
   voice = "vc1"
   source = "Ms. 2"
   author = "Urs Liska"
   date = "2013-06-06"
}

Of course, you might get unsets and overrides and reverts slipped in
which you would want to weed out again, but list? is also prone to
permitting a lot that you don't want to see.

-- 
David Kastrup