> In order to avoid this problem of sequence, I've first removed
> Script_column_engraver and appended it again /after/
> New_fingering_engraver. Looks funny but actually solves the
> problem.
>
> [...]
> \remove "Script_column_engraver"
> \consists "New_fingering_engraver" % *before* Script_column_engraver!
> \consists "Script_column_engraver"
Interesting. Is it documented somewhere that the order of `\consists`
calls is relevant (sometimes)? Or rather, is there an example in the
documentation or the regression test suite that demonstrates the
importance of the right order?
Or maybe there is a bug somewhere? I think not having to think about
the order would be quite beneficial. I think I would prefer setting a
property or the like to get the desired result.
Werner
