>> Interesting, though, that you like it better this way. I thought it
>> might cause some confusion later on or in users unfamiliar with the new
>> method of setting the style if there is only one exception to the
>> otherwise consistent naming convention for the alists.
>>
> 
> Hmm,
> which convention do you refer to?  
> 

Well, maybe I shouldn't have called it "convention". What I meant was
the pattern suggested by the naming of the other alists handling
accidentals. In fact, I just discovered that I was wrong in saying that
the default case is the only exception in the naming. But there clearly
are two distinct patterns:

  cancellation-glyph-name-alist
  makam-alteration-glyph-name-alist
  standard-alteration-glyph-name-alist

  alteration-hufnagel-glyph-name-alist
  alteration-medicaea-glyph-name-alist
  alteration-vaticana-glyph-name-alist
  alteration-mensural-glyph-name-alist

If someone sets the style of Accidentals (or KeySignatures or the like)
via \override Accidental #'style = ... and later uses convert-ly, the
output currently always follows the second pattern. I am not sure at all
if it makes sense to rename the alists but at least convert-ly should
handle the various cases correctly (so my last patch was incomplete,
too, because it neglected the first two alists above).

Max



_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Reply via email to