Re: [Issue #3947] fixing \huge et al.

[Carl Sorensen]

On 6/7/17 2:01 PM, "Kieren MacMillan" <address@hidden>
wrote:


>> Is there any place else in the codebase where we include lilypond
>>examples
>> in the doc strings?  It seems like we ought to try for consistency;
>>either
>> use lilypond examples in all of the doc strings (maybe at least for
>>markup
>> functions) or in none of them.  I don't know the right answer; I'm just
>> raising the question.
>
>It's a good question. I simply copied this code from
>define-markup-commands.scm. On quick glance, it appears that most of
>those functions have Lilypond examples in their doc string(s). In any
>case, I'll leave it as a different question, to be handled separately
>from the improvement of \huge et al.

It's a perfect answer -- that's what is currently being done in
define-markup-commands.scm, so we should continue doing that.

Thanks,

Carl