2012/10/12 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> writes: >> I'm less concerned than Werner about the inconsistency of the >> tweak syntax. The context needs to be specified only rarely, and >> it is a small price to pay for the enormous gain. > > Well, strictly speaking we are getting hosed at the latest when \tweak > supports tweaking nested properties. The problem with \tweak is that > the syntax really leaves no good place for an optional grob spec. > > We basically have > > \tweak property-path value music > > We can't fit an optional argument before "value" as value can take on > _any_ value and thus will fit the optional argument. We can't put it > _separately_ before property-path since property-path will fit fine > there as well. Fitting it before music currently means a restricted > form of music, and then we have > > \tweak color #red Accidental cis > > which is not all too hot. So I see really only two reasonably > consistent solutions that both involve _not_ using \tweak for the > grobbed variant: > > \tweakGrob Accidental color #red cis > > or > > \single \override Accidental color = #red cis > > since the latter is now available. It is just more effort both for > LilyPond and the user.
that last one makes me enthusiastic! (and apologies for not reading the patch - the time I can spend with LilyPond source is limited and needed for other projects.) p _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
