David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > Paul Morris <p...@paulwmorris.com> writes: > >> David Kastrup wrote >>> "replace" is a bit too generic in my opinion. I rather like the flair >>> of \behold. \substitute does not seem all that bad either, however. >> >> \behold does have flair, but I think it wouldn't really convey what we'd >> want. (i.e. pointing out what's already there or revealing something hidden >> (like James' \et_voila!), rather than making a change.) >> >> Anyway, I thought of another one: \swap >> >> ...to stick with four-letter words like \hide and \omit. > > No, the implication of "swap" is an exchange rather than a replacement. > Overriding with a specific stencil is going to be verbose anyway. How > about "\adorn"?
Less cute: \retouch. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
