David Kastrup wrote Friday, October 12, 2012 12:23 PM
> "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> writes: > >> X-offset and friends. I'd prefer to change these to x/y-offset, to >> unify the letter-casing of properties. Can also be addressed later. > > "addressed later" implies that this is a related issue, but in my book, > it is quite independent. Well, it would help in simplifying the description of the new syntax, that's all. >> 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 > > 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. I'd not object to either of these forms, but I think I'd prefer the dotted form of \tweak as the canonical syntax for the grob variant. >> I'm also encouraged by the hints you've dropped that #4 and 4 >> can also be made equivalent in the majority of cases. In a later >> patch, of course. > > Have you tried in the last half year? I should be surprised if you find > many places where they are not already perfectly interchangeable. The > problem is more making 4 mean a _duration_ when you need one. :) This implies another major doc change is needed then! Trevor _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
