Re: removing @lsr{} and only using @lsrdir{}

[Graham Percival]

No, @lsr{} is completely distinct from @lilypondfile.  @lsr{}
would create a link to a specific snippet; it would be used in the
@seealso
Snippets: @lsr{}

section.

Cheers,
- Graham


On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 08:19:13 +0300
Till Rettig <address@hidden> wrote:

> I'm fine with this -- the @lilypondfile is a much more powerful
> feature that does almost the same.
> 
> Till
> 
> Graham Percival schrieb:
> > Does anybody really want to keep @lsr{} (in addition to
> > @lsrdir{})?  It isn't used in any finished GDP sections, and I'm
> > 90% certain it isn't worth keeping.
> >
> > @lsrdir{Pitches, Pitches}  points to the whole collection of pitch
> > snippets.
> > @lsr{pitches, adding-ambitus-per-voice.ly, Ambitus}  (or something
> > like that; I can't recall the exact syntax)  gives us a link
> > directly to that snippet.
> >
> > I introduced @lsr{} back in the Bad Old Days when snippets were
> > sorted into directories; if you have a snippet that was useful for
> > two things, the only way to get it in two parts of the manual was
> > to use @lsr.  But nowadays, we can simply add two tags to the
> > snippet, and have it appear in both lists.
> >
> > We could then rename @lsrdir{} to @rlsr{} and use the same format
> > as all the other @rfoo{} macros.  That would simply the doc
> > source.
> >
> > Unless I hear voiciferous complaints before Monday, I'll remove
> > @lsr{}.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > - Graham
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lilypond-devel mailing list
> > address@hidden
> > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
> >
> >