On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 10:21:45AM +0000, tdanielsmu...@googlemail.com wrote: > I've not followed the corresponding email discussion closely, and maybe > I've missed something, but how is this better than simply using \obreak > for an original break, and \nbreak for a new, required, break, having > defined > > obreak = \break > nbreak = <> ... > That seems so simple anyone can do it without adding anything to the > base code and almost a page to the documentation.
This method is already in the documentation! At least, it used to be... Learning Manual, "tips for typesetting" or something like that? it's just possible it was moved to Notation or Usage at some point. But it was definitely in the docs ten years ago. (yes, literally 10 years ago. Mao, where did the time go?) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
