On 2008/07/05 11:33 -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote: > IMO, it's much more difficult to make (and verify) a rule that covers all of > the changes for a version. As we currently stand, if I make changes to the > syntax, all I have to do is write a simple rule to cover my changes. If we > had only one rule per version, then I'd have to integrate my rule with > everybody else's rule.
It's trivial to concatenate rules into a single function, and convert-ly applies rules sequentially anyway, so this is not a strong argument against merging; if necessary, we can make merged rules clearer with a comment for each rule in a conv function with multiple rules. So I still think the rules should be merged, and will do this unless somebody gives a good reason. Cheers, John _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
