Malte Meyn <lilyp...@maltemeyn.de> writes: > Am 01.11.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Malte Meyn: >> One could have the same convert-ly rule twice: First time for the >> version where a new feature is introduced and it’s *possible and >> recommended* to use it. Second time for the version where the old >> feature (and thus backward compatibility) is removed and you *have >> to* use it. > > F. e. if the \override syntax > > \override Staff.TimeSignature #'color = #red > > is removed some day IMO one would have to add the convert-ly rule that > turns it to > > \override Staff.TimeSignature.color = #red > > again because many people still use the old syntax that they find in > old code.
I don't really agree: that way lies madness. Do we take the time when something stops working reliably, or the time when it stops working altogether? I do try to keep rules "idempotent" as much as possible, making it harmless to apply them multiple times in a row. That allows just trying another sweeping convert-ly run. But this isn't really possible for all rules. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
