On 2020/03/29 00:35:02, dak wrote: > Retaining define-markup-command-internal in order to allow defining markups in > LilyPond syntax in a manner that stops being supported from Scheme seems like > incoherent design. > > markup-lambdas can be created from within LilyPond using \markup ... \etc . > Having them unusable from Scheme for the purpose of defining a markup function > seems inappropriate. > > If unsupporting the functionality via define-markup-command is desirable (which > I am not convinced of) or independently, it would seem that a more > regular/prominent module-define-markup-command! with appropriate semantics would > be warranted (and used from the parser) instead of retaining > define-markup-command-internal as a non-internal of define-markup-command.
By the way: that would also provide at least a workable way of making input/regression/pattern-markup-evaluation.ly work again without requiring a global definition of n . https://codereview.appspot.com/577720043/
