[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax |
Date: |
Mon, 16 Jul 2018 12:28:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:
> 2018-07-16 11:32 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>
>> To be fair, the doc string of make-engraver is
[...]
> It _is_ a good doc-string, no doubt, albeit it's not part of any
> manual.
Well, there once was documentation for Scheme_engraver (but you could
not actually consist a Scheme_engraver). Instead, we now have
documentation for things like Stem_span_engraver and
Merge_rests_engraver . Which are actually consistable engravers that
use the C++ structure Scheme_engraver.
Making the distinction between engraver creators and engravers and
underlying mechanisms was a rather icky procedure. As a result, the
internals manual can now contain different scheme engravers, but the
general Scheme_engraver mechanism that had always been out of place no
longer has a dedicated place in the manual. Not that its DOC string
ever was overly useful.
> And I thought more about sort of a table like the comparison of
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/input/regression/b8/lily-002a5ef5.ly and
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/input/regression/7d/lily-f57bd45c.ly
>
> Of course one could argue, both are not _ly_-syntax, but speaking only
> for me, I think it's very instructive having an example in both
> syntax.
Well, it's a matter of curation, finding a good place where people will
expect to find something like that when looking for it.
--
David Kastrup
- melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2018/07/15
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, David Kastrup, 2018/07/15
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, Carl Sorensen, 2018/07/15
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, Simon Albrecht, 2018/07/15
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, Carl Sorensen, 2018/07/15
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, Thomas Morley, 2018/07/16
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, David Kastrup, 2018/07/16
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax, Thomas Morley, 2018/07/16
- Re: melismaBusyProperties: scheme syntax vs. lily syntax,
David Kastrup <=