Graham Percival skrev:
I wouldn't be opposed to adding a
% added in 2.8.6
comment to snippets, though.
Will the original version be available somewhere, or is it lost forever
as soon as the convert-ly has been run?
If the original is lost I do not see a need for a comment on when the
snippet was introduced.
No code is "meant" to be old, but it happens. Trust me, I've been doing
the docs for over three years. That doesn't sound like a lot, but in
lilypond-years, that's a huge change.
That is true, and therefore I still think that the original version of
snippets should be kept - so that it as possible to reconstruct how they
originally looked. It is correct that in an ideal world snippets will
keep looking the same. But experience shows that severe bugs - even bugs
that are clearly visible in the manual - can be introduced into
lilypond, and stay undiscovered for quite a lot of time. For instance
still in latest stable the tabstaff will not use the lowermost string.
This bug almost screams that it is present:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.10/Documentation/user/lilypond/Tablatures-basic#Tablatures-basic
But still it survived quite a number of stable releases before it was
noticed.
So it is only in your dreams that you can even hope for all snippets at
all times showing the right thing. When seeing a snippet that does
something wrong it would be nice to know whether it is a bug in the
snippet or a regression in lilypond. The easiest way would be to compare
the output of the snippet with the output of snippet as it looked in the
lilypond that it was made for.
-Rune
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user