David Kastrup wrote > There is not one "code that handles overriding stencils". Overrides are > a general mechanism. So we are talking about the code _interpreting_ > stencils. This code will tend to be some get_property ("stencil") call. > There are a lot of those from a lot of different engravers. > > Making this consistently workable would require tampering with a lot of > call sites.
Ah, ok, I get it now. Thanks for the explanation. (So if someone tries to override a stencil with a markup, the markup is actually set as the grob's stencil property at that point, and it's not until an engraver tries to interpret it that an error is given, because a stencil is expected and not a markup.) David Kastrup wrote >> You know the code and I trust your judgement. I'm just curious. In >> any case, a command like \appearance would get the job done and be >> simpler for the user. I suppose it could accept either a markup or a >> stencil and just pass the stencil through to the override (or tweak) >> if a stencil was supplied. > > A user-level command could indeed accept either markup or stencil and > create a suitable override depending on which it gets. There is, > however, also the possibility to write \markup \stencil #... in order to > let a markup pass through a stencil. It's just more verbose and more > back-and-forth. Good point. I still like accepting either markup or stencil since it's simpler for the user, but either way would work. Cheers, -Paul -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Re-Issue-3918-Add-alternatingTimeSignatures-issue-97110045-tp162462p162567.html Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel