[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Substitute for s1*0

From: Trevor Daniels
Subject: Re: Substitute for s1*0
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 10:08:09 +0100

Keith OHara wrote Tuesday, May 08, 2012 3:48 AM

Trevor Daniels <t.daniels <at>> writes:

Yes, I now agree.  We can't continue to advocate s1*0
in the docs now we are aware of these pitfalls.

I suggest we mention that <> takes no time in NR 1.5.1 Chorded Notes, but avoid it in the examples.

Most of the visible uses of s1*0 in the docs were instigated by me, so I see how to avoid them.

This seems like a sensible way forward.  Let's take it a
step at a time:

1. Raise a bug report to highlight the problems of s1*0,
giving the <> workaround.  That seems standard procedure
for the bug squad - a problem has been identified and a
workaround suggested. David - thanks for alerting us to this!

2. Document the semantics of <> in NR 1.5.1.  Does anyone
dissent from this?  Ian has already provided a reasonable
first draft.

3. Look at the individual uses of s1*0 and see first if its use can be avoided. We can discuss each of these individually, considering the relative merits of using alternative approaches (if any) or using <>.


reply via email to

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