Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 05:18:16PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> and it is queried in quite a few places. Lilypond 1.8 seems like a >> rather old version to support. >> >> Do we really need to have this around? Anybody even knows what it does? > > IIRC, old-relative had to do with the behavior of relative octaves > and repeats -- should the second alternative be based on the last > note *before* the first alternative, or the last note *inside* the > first alternative.
Sounds plausible. > I would rather postpone any discussion about keeping this until > the GOP proposal on deprecation. Vaguely scheduled for Dec. I actually asked this question because it was blocking me on tackling the "remove \relative from the grammar" patch currently sitting in dev/staging. However, I figured out I had to write at least one supportive ly:* C function anyway, and so I just transplanted the old code from parser.yy literally into that function and thus postponed thinking about the question. Code like that does make it harder to do changes. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
