On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 11:11 AM David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote:

> Luca Fascione <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 10:08 AM David Kastrup <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm just being overly analytic here, David, but I think I'm hearing
> > you say that this thing currently called "book" is really a
> > "collection of parts",
>
> No, it isn't.  Or rather, we have a Book class that implements both what
> LilyPond invokes as \book and what LilyPond invokes as \bookpart, that
> class contains everything that either a \book or \bookpart needs, and
> there are functions cobbling them together without bothering to
> distinguish them.
>

Yes I realize that, indeed this is where it all started, I was meaning
"book" sans its "bookpart"... part.
You know, just in its incarnations where you're not considering its
"bookpart" potential.

I thought you were heading in a direction where "one Book class to do two
things is a bad idea",
and wanted to cut that class up into pieces, you see. I may have
misunderstood what you meant before then.




-- 
Luca Fascione
  • Re: Splitting b... Dan Eble
    • Re: Splitt... David Kastrup
      • Re: Sp... Luca Fascione
        • Re... David Kastrup
          • ... Luca Fascione
            • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Luca Fascione
              • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Luca Fascione
              • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Luca Fascione
              • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Luca Fascione
              • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Luca Fascione
              • ... Lukas-Fabian Moser via Discussions on LilyPond development
              • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Lukas-Fabian Moser via Discussions on LilyPond development
              • ... David Kastrup
              • ... Lukas-Fabian Moser via Discussions on LilyPond development
      • Re: Sp... Dan Eble

Reply via email to