Re: duplicated material in docs (music functions)

[Carl Sorensen]

On 4/24/10 11:58 AM, "Mark Polesky" <address@hidden> wrote:

> There's duplicated material in these two sections:
>   NR 5.6 Using music functions
>   EX 2.1 Music functions
> 
> I'd rather
> * reduce NR 5.6 to a tiny stub with a cross-reference to
>   EX 2.1
> * reword EX 2.1 to match the more newbie-friendly tone of
>   NR 5.6
> 
> Any objections to this idea?

Yes!  We don't want just a tiny stub in NR, because simple substitution
functions can be done without understanding any Scheme at all. And it can be
useful to non-Scheme LilyPond users.  Making non-Scheme LilyPond users jump
into Extending just to do a simple substitution function is wrong, in my
opinion.

EL 2.1 is part of the documentation that teaches about programming using
scheme.

If you want to eliminate 2.1.2 and replace it with a link to NR 5.6, I'm OK
with that.  NR 5.6. is new editing; EL 2.1 is old.

NR 5.6 is intended to only cover simple substitution functions, which is a
subset of Music Functions.  EL 2.1 is intended to cover all about music
functions.  But it's in need of significant rewriting.  If you want to go
about eliminating duplication, that's the place that I think you should be
working. 
> 
> By the way, what's the proper abbreviation for "Extending"?

EL, as far as I can see.  Short for Extending LilyPond.

Thanks,

Carl