Re: Reverting Beat Grouping Commands

[Trevor Daniels]

Neil Puttock wrote Saturday, April 25, 2009 4:27 PM


> 2009/4/25 Carl D. Sorensen <address@hidden>:
> > On 4/25/09 8:24 AM, "Neil Puttock" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > > 2009/4/22 Carl D. Sorensen <address@hidden>:
> > >
> > > > Does this help clarify what I'm thinking?
> > >
> > > Yes, thank you.
> > >
> > > To be honest, I'm not convinced by the idea of using a fake grob 
> > > just
> > > for the convenience of easy overriding and reverting.
> >
> > Why would we not want to develop a mechanism that allows the use 
> > of standard
> > LilyPond syntax?
>
> It's not standard syntax for context properties to pretend to be a
> non-existent grob purely for the purposes of using \override and
> \revert.

Just to recap, the advantage of \override over \set is that 
previously
overridden values can be recovered by \revert because they are
pushed onto a stack, whereas \unset simply restores the original
default value.  Is that right?  If so, are there any other context
properties that might benefit from a similar push-down stack?
The action of \set would need to be changed, and a new command,
\reset, maybe, created to pop the previous value, leaving \unset to
clear the stack to the default.  Then the autobeaming rules could
be implemented properly as context values.

My knowledge of the internals is not sufficient to judge whether 
this
is feasible or even possible, but is this an alternative approach
worth considering?

Trevor