At 12:29 on 06 Nov 2024, David Kastrup wrote: > Check out > <https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/137874/lilypond-how-to-modify-stencil-by-automatically-getting-the-current-stencil-and> > and its (currently) two answers while the second one > (which was posted first) has not been removed.
> This second answer has obviously been written by a capable > LilyPond programmer. Compare its complexity and > versatility with the first answer. > Why hasn't a capable LilyPond programmer not been able to > come up with a much simpler and much more versatile > solution as shown in the first answer? > LilyPond has received a lot of work to facilitate simple > solutions, and yet the better approachability tends to > rather lend itself to people becoming more confident > designing overcomplicated solutions. > What kind of project should we tackle in order to help > people better use what is there in a manner that is > reasonably easy to use and understand? > How can we better spread best programming practices and > showcase the tools that are available for them? Given that this particular case seems to have come from an LSR snippet, I guess keeping those snippets up-to-date with best practices could be one approach. BTW, it seems \propertyTweak and friends do not appear anywhere in the documentation (other than the list of music functions) - should they be in 5.1.3 Tweaking methods? -- Mark Knoop
