Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/11 20:53:53, Keith wrote: On 2013/02/11 12:39:02, dak wrote: > On 2013/02/11 09:25:20, dak wrote: > > On 2013/02/11 06:18:57, Keith wrote: > > > > > > I was hoping to be able to provide a backward-compatibility function, as in > > I did not even look at the proposed patch but it t

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/11 12:39:02, dak wrote: On 2013/02/11 09:25:20, dak wrote: > On 2013/02/11 06:18:57, Keith wrote: > > > > I was hoping to be able to provide a backward-compatibility function, as in > I did not even look at the proposed patch but it touches several binaries. That > should not be n

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/11 09:25:20, dak wrote: On 2013/02/11 06:18:57, Keith wrote: > On 2013/02/09 08:54:03, dak wrote: > > > It doesn't matter. LilyPond is still being actively maintained. If a > > feature is required, it can be implemented properly, with a proper > > interface, _without_ resorting to e

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/11 06:18:57, Keith wrote: On 2013/02/09 08:54:03, dak wrote: > It doesn't matter. LilyPond is still being actively maintained. If a > feature is required, it can be implemented properly, with a proper > interface, _without_ resorting to exploits. > I was hoping to be able to

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/09 08:54:03, dak wrote: It doesn't matter. LilyPond is still being actively maintained. If a feature is required, it can be implemented properly, with a proper interface, _without_ resorting to exploits. I was hoping to be able to provide a backward-compatibility function, as in

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/09 05:46:45, Keith wrote: On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 01:20:59 -0800, wrote: > On 2013/02/08 08:40:29, dak wrote: >> On 2013/02/08 04:46:27, Keith wrote: >> > Yesterday's patch was better. > >> I beg to differ. It did not address instrument definitions, or manual >

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 01:20:59 -0800, wrote: On 2013/02/08 08:40:29, dak wrote: On 2013/02/08 04:46:27, Keith wrote: > Yesterday's patch was better. I beg to differ. It did not address instrument definitions, or manual settings Well, we had a nice plane for \instrumentSwitch, and I did no

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/08 08:40:29, dak wrote: On 2013/02/08 04:46:27, Keith wrote: > Yesterday's patch was better. I beg to differ. It did not address instrument definitions, or manual settings Concretely: can you show an example of not-just-academical LilyPond source that would be change to the worse

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

On 2013/02/08 04:46:27, Keith wrote: Yesterday's patch was better. I beg to differ. It did not address instrument definitions, or manual settings of instrumentTransposition. The 'untransposable property is more closely related to the source of the events (\transposition or \instrumentSwitc

Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

Yesterday's patch was better. The 'untransposable property is more closely related to the source of the events (\transposition or \instrumentSwitch) than to the event type (override or propertySet). https://codereview.appspot.com/7303057/diff/2001/scm/define-music-types.scm File scm/define-music