On 2010/10/31 22:40:57, Carl wrote:
This is going away, so it won't apply to this patch (because we don't
need to
acknowledge glissandos). But if we did, and we added a
glissando-interface,
then instead of Tab_tie_follow_engraver::acknowledge_line_spanner
wouldn't we
just use Tab_tie_follow_engraver::acknowledge_glissando?
Yes.
But it would seem strange to me to add an interface with no properties
that can
be set, which is what I think I'd be doing if I added a glissando_interface.
Any
comment on this thought?
If you look in define-grob-interfaces.scm, you'll see several interfaces with no properties: most of them exist just to allow engravers to distinguish between grobs which would normally be lumped together (e.g., acknowledging line-spanner-interface, when you really want something more specific). Cheers, Neil http://codereview.appspot.com/2723043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
