On Fri, 31 Dec 2010 16:31:23 -0800, Trevor Daniels <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> wrote:
... the concern I had was this. Quite a lot of the documentation was written, not by inspecting the code to see what was intended, but by experimenting and writing up what was found. I certainly worked that way, and I think Mark and Keith did recently in documenting the new spacing stuff.
Pretty much. If it makes you feel better, I did read a fair bit of the code to help build up a mental model of how things worked. You remember that we rejected documenting those cross-staff collisions, until the code made it clear to me that some collisions were intentional, and possibly unavoidable. More generally, we naturally sort our experimental findings into possible-bugs and oh-that's-how-it-works-s
Now if you can work in something about "working as intended or documented"
That sounds good, and natural. In most people's minds, documented implies intended. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
