Re: Overrides and nesting: intentional?

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

Am Freitag, 5. August 2011, 19:08:43 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Proposal 1: \override should not start with an internal \revert but
> rather do just what the user documentation says: push its own version in
> front of the existing alist of properties, without deleting existing
> overrides.

That's what I would expect, too. 
Of course, then the list of overrides will grow with every override and might 
be quite large for a very long score...

> Obviously, something considered bad will happen, or the code would not
> go to the pains to do what it does now.  What is the bad thing that will
> happen?

I think that only Han-Wen can answer that question. That behavior (revert if 
the music property pop-first ist set) was introduced in between versions 
1.3.109 and 1.3.111 (commit f085824b2182c1f0fa2c5118884770ac7ff775c7 ) in 
November 2000.

Cheers,
Reinhold

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org