Kieren MacMillan <[email protected]> writes: > Hi David K, > >> And remove the utterly pointless >> >> \context { >> \Global >> \grobdescriptions #all-grob-descriptions >> } > > 1. Interesting! This is what I was specifically told to do by Mike > S. Was it necessary in an earlier version, but not now?
It is not in any way related to the code you posted. Since I am not privy to your communications with Mike, I cannot vouch for any earlier versions he might have written using different mechanisms. At any rate, it redefines all grob definitions in the global context to the values they are set to anyway. It would be "pointless" if it did an operation related to the task at hand but already catered for by the system. In this case, however, it is "utterly pointless" since it is not merely a task the system does on its own anyway, but since it is a task completely unrelated to the rest of the code. I have no idea why Mike would "specifically tell you" in relation to this code to put this in. I would suspect either a copy&paste error on his part or you mixing up instructions for two different problems or at least two different solutions. > 2. In the future, perhaps leave out the utterly useless word “utterly” > from your otherwise helpful answers; it’ll go a long way to keeping > the spirit of the list above the dirt. An equally effective — and much > more positive — answer would have been “And remove the unnecessary”, > which even would have saved you six keystrokes as a bonus. You probably would not believe the amount of problems caused by the cruft people collect into their personal files based on what they believe someone told them to be a good idea. In addition for setting up people for problems later on, it also spreads the firm belief that a program like LilyPond is inherently incomprehensible and will only react to hand-waving by the right people. Also it leads to "I have not upgraded program x because then my code stops working" phenomenon since having code in your program that is merely useless in one version is no guarantee that it will not cause breakage in the next. Because the programmers cannot possibly anticipate every kind of code that might have been put in for good luck. I'm spending most of my time and efforts beating sense into LilyPond and its documentation, so I tend to be less than trilled if I see it walk out the open back gate again. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
