Re: Question about score count

[Carl Peterson]

That worked beautifully. The follow-up question:

 

Because of the long time it naturally takes to render many scores, when I'm working on the initial files, I run the individual scores as separate files to be included in the main file once I'm done. Naturally, I would want to define the scheme functions in the main file, so that it doesn't reset with each score. However, if I need to edit an individual score, I won't get very far because the functions/variables won't be defined without the main file.

 

So...is there a command that would allow me to include a file only once (so that if it is included a second time, it won't actually be executed) OR to detect whether the variable has been initialized? I would prefer the first since that would take care of some formatting-related issues, but either would be good.

 

Cheers,

Carl

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 10:38 PM, Jay Anderson <address@hidden> wrote:

On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 7:20 PM, Carl Peterson <address@hidden> wrote:
> Is there a property or counter buried somewhere in Lilypond/Scheme for a
> running count of score contexts? This is for a hymnal/psalter project where
> I want to number the songs but don't want to deal with integrating lilypond
> output into something else (like LaTeX).

You can create your own counter.
============
\version "2.17.15"

#(define count 0)
#(define (get-next)
  (set! count (+ 1 count))
  count)
#(define (numbered-title title)
  (string-append (number->string (get-next)) ". " title))

\paper
{
  print-all-headers = ##t
}

\score
{
  \new Staff \relative c' { c4 c c c }
  \header
  {
    title = #(numbered-title "A")
  }
}

\score
{
  \new Staff \relative c' { c4 c c c }
  \header
  {
    title = #(numbered-title "B")
  }
}

\score
{
  \new Staff \relative c' { c4 c c c }
  \header
  {
    title = #(numbered-title "C")
  }
}
============

This is quick and dirty, but it might work for what you need.

Another option is to generate your scores from a function. This way
you can generate them in a loop passing in the counter. This would be
more complicated.