Hi Harm, On 4/15/15 4:30 PM, "Thomas Morley" <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hi Carl, > >before going into details, let us decide how to proceed. > >The current patch was intended to be not more than maintaining the >stuff different. >First step seemed to me putting the needed data into an alist. > >2015-04-13 4:22 GMT+02:00 <carl.d.soren...@gmail.com>: > >> It seems to me that this patch is mostly maintaining the mix of parsing >> and display; it's just putting the stuff into a list first. > >So you are absolutely right. > >I think you would prefer to dig in deeper, though. My impression (although I haven't studied it carefully as recently as you have, so I might be wrong) is that the current system goes through the chord and creates a bunch of markup information that it puts together into a markup. Changing it to put the markup information in an alist seems to still mix the markup and the parsing. The stuff that seems to me should go in the alist is structural information about the chord, rather than markup information. So for me, the alist you are creating doesn't even really pave the way for the kind of separation I envision. >> >> >>https://codereview.appspot.com/223420043/diff/20001/scm/chord-ignatzek-na >>mes.scm#newcode395 >> scm/chord-ignatzek-names.scm:395: ;;;; Step 2: Define formatter for the >> chord-elements using this list >> I'm not sure how this separation between step 1 and step 2 really >> accomplishes the stated goal of the patch. Can you give an example of >> how this makes it easier to define a new display style for a chord? > >This patch doesn't pretend to provide a user-interface for it. I wasn't asking for a user interface. I was more just asking for a logical sketch of how it would work. >Already possible is the following, though. I couldn't make the following code work. I don't have chord-info, or format-alterations, or any of the other format-*. Are you proposing this as a potential way to work with the things in your patch, and that chord-info would result from a call to ChordNamer? Or am I totally missing things here? And I have no desire to stand in the way of your patch, if it's moving things forward in a way that you have found useful. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
