T1780 - Guile V2 deprecation warnings re format calls with no dest parameter

T1780 - Guile V2 deprecation warnings re format calls with no dest parameter 
1. David's original patch 2. ly/init.ly, graphviz_init.ly and titling_init.ly now use ly:format

[Ian Hulin (gmail), 2011-07-30 22:32:13]

This patch removes all deprecation warnings about Guile format needing two
parameters.  
This is the original patch as pushed by David, plus changes in ly/init.ly,
ly/titling-init.ly and ly/graphviz_init.ly to use ly:format instead of format in
embedded scheme statements.

[dak, 2011-07-30 22:42:59]

If I understand correctly, ly:format might be useful for printing Lilypond's own
data structures.

Anyway, I discovered after already having applied my patch that Lilypond was
intended to replace the system format with its own version.

So the question is whether we should try to find out why this did not work. 
According to the comments in lily.scm, this replacement was done likely for
performance reasons.

So it is possible that a better course would have been to revert my patch (at
least where it uses the #f port), and find out why the replacements of the
system format are likely not working as intended.

[dak, 2011-07-30 22:55:46]

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (left):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#o...
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1490: (stacked-extent (ly:stencil-extent
stacked-stencil X)))
What is the deal with this change?  It is not related to formatting, is it?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#n...
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1902: RIGHT
And this change?

[Reinhold, 2011-07-30 22:59:11]

I think that you forgot to rebase your branch to origin/master before uploading
that patch. Your version does not have some of the latest patches in the git
tree, so it appears that you are reverting some of those patches.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (left):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#o...
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1491: (ly:stencil-translate-axis stacked-stencil
(- (car stacked-extent)) X )))
Are you sure you want to revert this patch of mine?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#o...
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1966: main-stencil
Same goes here... Have you rebased your git branch to origin/master before
running "git cl upload origin/master"? It seems your current branch does not
have some of the latest patches.

[Ian Hulin (gmail), 2011-07-31 13:29:08]

On 2011/07/30 22:59:11, Reinhold wrote:
> I think that you forgot to rebase your branch to origin/master before
uploading
> that patch. Your version does not have some of the latest patches in the git
> tree, so it appears that you are reverting some of those patches.
> 
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
> File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (left):
> 
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#o...
> scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1491: (ly:stencil-translate-axis
stacked-stencil
> (- (car stacked-extent)) X )))
> Are you sure you want to revert this patch of mine?
> 
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#o...
> scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1966: main-stencil
> Same goes here... Have you rebased your git branch to origin/master before
> running "git cl upload origin/master"? It seems your current branch does not
> have some of the latest patches.

Nice catch, Reinhold,  I'll re-implement David's patch after a re-base and
upload another patchset for review.
Ian