|
From: | Graham Percival |
Subject: | Re: Paper size |
Date: | Mon, 27 Feb 2006 21:16:22 -0800 |
On 25-Feb-06, at 3:01 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:In fact, why not simply have \paper { paper-size = "a4" }I have nothing against scheme expressions, but I don't see why the paper size (and global staff size) need scheme. If we could define them like normal \paper or \layout variables, we could avoid some newbie confusion.because setting paper-size implies setting line-width and a number of other variables. Check out the definition of set-paper-size for details.
Yes, it does a bunch of stuff "under the hood", but a user need not be concerned with it. I'm just wondering if we could do
// pseudocode if ( (\paper-option)==(paper-size $1 $2) ) then #(set-default-paper-size $1 $2)I freely admit my lack of experience in programming, but I can't imagine how some syntactic sugar like this would change anything substantive in the way that lily works internally.
If we could add two such rules -- paper-size and staff-size -- then we could avoid #(...) constructs entirely for simple scores. (mostly the default-paper-size... I wish that everybody used A4 paper, but it's hard to find in North America. And if you want to print at university, you're stuck with usletter. :(
I have absolutely no objection to requiring explicit scheme expressions for other stuff, but IMO these two items are pretty basic.
Cheers, - Graham
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |