[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Add commands (issue 150670043 by address@hidden)

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Add commands (issue 150670043 by address@hidden)
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 11:27:59 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux)

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 09.10.2014 10:44, schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
>>> And I would really love to see that being part of LilyPond itself and
>>> not only possible to implement in a library.
>>> Firstly because I would like *all* LilyPond users to have that
>>> available and secondly because I would like to add this as a Layout
>>> Control Option to Frescobaldi.
>> When those goals conflict with placing specific functionality in a
>> library, we have an infrastructure problem.  We won't solve that problem
>> by cramming everything into the core, not least of all because such
>> specific solutions cannot really reliably be turned into a
>> one-size-fits-all approach.
>> So it is important _not_ to have shrinkwrapped functionality for a
>> particular purpose _forced_ onto users but have it loadable on demand.
>> And be able to offer choice between one or several different solutions
>> as well as rolling your own.
> My approach *is* loadable on demand (just as the guitar fretboards).
> What *could* make sense in my opinion is instead of adding "secondary"
> files to the /ly directory adding them to a separate directory which
> could contain such add-ons. Is there anything that makes my suggestion
> less general than, say, the mentioned guitar fretboards?

Yes.  The guitar fretboards concern a whole family of instruments
literally millions of people play.

Your extension makes only very limited sense for scores reproducing the
"original breaks" of a single canonical original document.  That's a
rather specific situation.  If the breaks in _one_ version of a score
are so important, why is that the _only_ conceivable version of the
score with relevant breaks?  And if that is the only conceivable
version, why would we put the breaks in conditionally?  If they are
disabled, we could be producing _another_ document with breaks that
nobody should ever want to reproduce.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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