On 2014/08/08 14:13:57, dak wrote:
On 2014/08/08 14:10:18, dak wrote: > On 2014/08/07 19:40:37, janek wrote:
> > Ok. I'll change it to grob::property-from-event when pushing, if
you
> > don't mind. > > > > Oh phooey. Rethinking this, what about just grob::event-property
and
> (eventually) > grob::parent-property ? The grob:: makes clear that we are starting
from a
> grob, > and the xxx-property makes clear where we are ultimately looking. > > We don't really need more than that in the name, do we? > > Sorry for being late again with this proposal...
Uh, strike that. grob::event-property would be fine for directly
reading from
the corresponding event property, but that's not what grob::event-property does.
Instead it
returns a callback that, when called, reads directly from the event property. So it does
make
sense to put the "from" in there, or some other phrase we pick for indicating a
callback
generator.
But then probably grob::from-event-property might be less jumbled, and possibly grob::event-property-getter might bring the callback nature better across. Of course, this reeks of wanting to become a whole naming convention at one point of time. Should we run this through another discussion cycle with the strong premise that the naming chosen here might, at a later point of time, be adopted for all similar callback generators? https://codereview.appspot.com/122750044/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
