[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Change syntax for woodwind-diagram markup (issue1946043)

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: Change syntax for woodwind-diagram markup (issue1946043)
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 02:57:59 -0600

On 8/15/10 2:39 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:

> address@hidden writes:
>> On 2010/08/14 19:47:59, Neil Puttock wrote:
>>> Since these are bound with defaults above, you don't need to use
>> chain-assoc-get
>>> (radius size)
>> Done.  I forgot about how nifty the new interface is that David made
>> possible.
> Actually, the niftiness is due to Nicolas and was there before my
> changes, but
> a) restricted to Lilypond-internal markup functions (which the woodwinds
>    now are, so they could already have used this).
> b) basically undocumented, partly justifiable because the functionality
>    was not user-accessible anyway.
> And I am not all too sure that b) is much better than previously.  I
> just noticed that the documentation says
>    If the command uses properties from the PROPS arguments, the
> `#:properties' keyword can be used, to specify which properties are
> used, and their default values.
> and there is no mention whatsoever of the property symbols being bound
> to the respective property in the function body.
> In short: the documentation would not have helped you remember the
> niftiness which you forgot.

This may be so, but even if the documentation were there I would probably
have missed it, because when I first learned user-defined markups, I learned
to do the chain-assoc-get from props.  And so I just had old habits.

> Since it was me that moved the niftiness into user-accessible and thus
> to-be-documented realms, that is my fault.
> Sorry.  I'll commit a fix soonish.

I don't see any fault to be assigned.  But I do agree that some improved
documentation (probably in Extending) would be useful.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]