David Nalesnik-2 wrote
On 2015/02/16 07:56:10, dak wrote:
Needing to determine the name of a grob should actually rarely be
necessary:
the pervasive information connected to the functionality of a grob is
rather its
interfaces. That's the usual criterion for deciding whether to deal with
a
Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com writes:
David Nalesnik-2 wrote
On 2015/02/16 07:56:10, dak wrote:
Needing to determine the name of a grob should actually rarely be
necessary:
the pervasive information connected to the functionality of a grob is
rather its
interfaces. That's the usual
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:30 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com writes:
I suppose even better would be to come up with a way to automatically
document public Scheme functions, but I wouldn't know how to do that
at this point.
Shouldn't actually
David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com writes:
I suppose even better would be to come up with a way to automatically
document public Scheme functions, but I wouldn't know how to do that
at this point.
Shouldn't actually be too hard. But I doubt that all functions with doc
strings would
Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com writes:
dak wrote
Paul Morris lt;
paul@
gt; writes:
Hmmm... would it be a good idea to also have a ly:grob-has-interface
scheme
function?
How would it differ from the existing grob::has-interface
Um... oops, I guess it wouldn't... Never mind, I
dak wrote
Paul Morris lt;
paul@
gt; writes:
Hmmm... would it be a good idea to also have a ly:grob-has-interface
scheme
function?
How would it differ from the existing grob::has-interface
Um... oops, I guess it wouldn't... Never mind, I just didn't know about
grob::has-interface. (I
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com wrote:
P.S. FWIW, here's one marginal use case. I've been using grob names to
differentiate key signature grobs from key cancellation grobs, within a
custom engraver that acknowledges the key-signature-interface. I could add
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 12:20 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com writes:
dak wrote
Paul Morris lt;
paul@
gt; writes:
Hmmm... would it be a good idea to also have a ly:grob-has-interface
scheme
function?
How would it differ from the
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com wrote:
On Feb 16, 2015, at 2:06 PM, David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com
wrote:
In this case, KeySignature has both key-signature-interface and
key-cancellation-interface, but KeyCancellation only has
On Feb 16, 2015, at 2:06 PM, David Nalesnik david.nales...@gmail.com wrote:
In this case, KeySignature has both key-signature-interface and
key-cancellation-interface, but KeyCancellation only has
key-cancellation-interface, so you can still use interfaces here.
Thanks David N. Yes, I
On 2015/02/16 13:46:29, david.nalesnik wrote:
On 2015/02/16 07:56:10, dak wrote:
On 2015/02/15 19:54:19, david.nalesnik wrote:
Please review. Thanks!
Needing to determine the name of a grob should actually rarely be
necessary:
the pervasive information connected to the functionality of
On 2015/02/16 07:56:10, dak wrote:
On 2015/02/15 19:54:19, david.nalesnik wrote:
Please review. Thanks!
Needing to determine the name of a grob should actually rarely be
necessary:
the pervasive information connected to the functionality of a grob is
rather its
interfaces. That's the
On Feb 16, 2015, at 1:20 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
That only documents functions written in C++. We don't really have a
reasonably complete compendium of user-accessible LilyPond programming
resources.
Ok, thanks for the tip. It would be nice to have more complete
13 matches
Mail list logo
