>>
>>- I'm still getting used to the idea of the libraries being dependent
>>on
>>general oll code (for things like setting options, etc.). Part of me
>>would
>>like to have them work on their own, although I guess that would still
>>be
>>possible for that to happen if the library author/maint
those little
helper functions one uses to write one can consider moving it to a shared
utility library. I've started that with the functions parsing a rhythmic
location originally developed for \annotate.
Thanks fir your input.
Best
Urs
>
>Cheers,
>-Paul
>
>
>
>
eral oll code (for things like setting options, etc.). Part of me would
like to have them work on their own, although I guess that would still be
possible for that to happen if the library author/maintainer chose to do it
that way.
Cheers,
-Paul
--
View this message in context:
http
Am 08.02.2015 um 16:16 schrieb Urs Liska:
We had already made some promising experiments, but only using the
header-style documentation and usage examples mentioned above.
See http://openlilylib.org/oll-test/index.html to get a first idea.
___
lilyp
Hello everybody,
triggered by some comments on my last post
http://lilypondblog.org/2015/01/introducing-scholarly/ I decided to pick
up a few loose ends that have been lying around for some time now, so I
finally started restructuring openLilyLib, aiming at a quite fundamental
change.
So th
