On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 3:41 AM Valentin Petzel <valen...@petzel.at> wrote:
> Yes, of course it is :). But I think there are reasonable cases to do so. > The > issue here is of course stability: If we wanted to issue some code which > is > supposed to remain functional for years to come, this is ill suited, as it > does not solely rely on the interface Lilypond provides. So if you were to > extend Lilypond this way someone would need to maintain this against the > current version of Lilypond. > > But I think doing so is a very effective way of creating a proof of > concept how > internals could be handled differently. Because it is quite simple to > create a > Lilypond file that adapts some internals and tell people to try this > rather > than forking the codebase, adapting the scheme files and telling people to > build Lilypond from that source. > > I think in this case the naming of midi files is something that might be > something Lilypond should be able to handle (because naming the output > files is > not an unreasonable thing, and putting midi scores in singular books just > to > get this done seems like it is handled in the wrong place), and this code > demonstrates how this could be done. And the abilty to quickly try out > different such options is in my option very useful. > > Cheers, > Valentin > > Am Freitag, 30. Juni 2023, 22:16:01 CEST schrieb Jean Abou Samra: > > Le mardi 27 juin 2023 à 21:17 +0200, Valentin Petzel a écrit : > > > Hello Knute, > > > > > > so you are using books to allow specification of the midi filename. > This > > > is > > > probably a fine usecase, but it still seems like a bit of an abuse of > the > > > book mechanic to me. Rather I’d adapt the midi output name logic > itself. > > > > > > This code adapts the internal function responsible for writing out the > > > midi > > > performances (scm/midi.scm:write-performances-midis) in such a way that > > > > #(set-current-module (resolve-module '(lily))) is true lock picking :-) I > > mean, sometimes you really can't avoid monkeypatching internals, but I'd > > reserve it for desperate cases. > Hi Valentin and Jean. I appreciate what you guys are doing for me. I'm stuck as to how to move forward. Although the Scheme code is amazing, I don't want to have to maintain it from version to version, mainly because I lack the knowledge of how to do so. I cannot go back to using a book for the MIDI score because of the problem of "-1" being appended to the PDF file name. What's a stable way of naming the MIDI score files? -- Knute Snortum
