Re: order of function arguments

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> 2013/4/23 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> 2013/4/23 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>>>> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>>>>> Btw, issue 2540 made it possible to write
>>>>>
>>>>> \version "2.17.3"
>>>>> { < \tweak Accidental #'color #red cis' fis'' > }
>>>>>
>>>>> which colored the sharp of the cis.  Is it possible to achieve the
>>>>> same goal with newer versions?  I've tried some combinations with
>>>>> 2.17.13 but they failed.
>>>>
>>>> If you don't want to read the manual, you can use convert-ly.
>>>
>>> Hmm.  I tried, but apparently Frescobaldi tricked me - it appeared as
>>> if the conversion didn't change anything.  Apologies - i've tried
>>> doing this directly with command line, which worked and gave me
>>>
>>> \version "2.17.3"
>>> { < \tweak Accidental.color #red cis' fis'' > }
>>>
>>> which, quite frankly, is exactly what i hoped for!  Woohoo!  Now we're
>>> talking.  So, current \tweak syntax is actually
>>>
>>> \tweak grob-property-path value grob-or-music
>>> (not \tweak property value grob-or-music as i mistakenly thought)
>>
>> And if you really put a grob name last, you don't get a tweak but an
>> override.
>
> So, a \tweak gets, so to speak, "internally transformed to an
> override"?  This is cool!!

Well, it no longer has music to apply to, only a grob name.  I am not
enthused about the resulting syntax/order when one _does_ need to
specify properties or subproperties for a command using \tweak
internally when employing it as an override.

But at least as a tweak, it looks nice.

-- 
David Kastrup