On 2013/12/16 09:58:40, mike7 wrote:
On Dec 16, 2013, at 11:45 AM, mailto:[email protected] wrote:

> The summary seems incompatible with
> <URL:http://music.stackexchange.com/a/14160/8773>
>
> Once an interface is required for outside-staffing a grob, the set
of
> grobs one can use in that manner is hardwired to the "intended"
grobs.

This is true.  The outside-staff-interface would need to be applied to
every
grob that could, in theory, be shifted this way.  I’d need help in
flagging
grobs I’ve missed - I’ve gotten everything that uses it in the
regtests, but
there are others that are not tested.  The stackexchange example is
one of
them.

I think the hardwiring is good in that we should avoid letting grobs
implement
interfaces with properties that could never, in any circumstance,
apply to them.

[...]

As a corollary, if it doesn’t exist already, we may want to create a
mechanism
to add or subtract interfaces from grobs at runtime.

As a corollary, if it doesn't exist already, we may want to create a
mechanism to add interfaces to grobs with properties that could never,
in any circumstance, apply to them?

That does not look like a corollary.  More like an antithesis.


https://codereview.appspot.com/37950044/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Reply via email to