Quoth Mats Bengtsson: > It wouldn't make sense to let a user specify a context name > with \new, since then there is no longer any guarantee that > the context really is new, right? Also, if you want to name a > context, then you should use \context.
Would it make sense to permit \new Foo = "bar", but have it be an error if a "bar" context already existed? I think that would actually help someone get a good handle on exactly what contexts they're creating, as opposed to which ones they are re-entering for whatever reason. It would also help you catch when you accidentally reuse a name. I'm not proposing that \context Foo = "bar" *couldn't* create a new context, though, as I don't think there's any error-checking benefit to that and it would break all the old files. -- -=-Don [EMAIL PROTECTED]<http://www.blahedo.org/>-=- The more things change, the more they stay insane. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
