On 8/15/10 2:39 AM, "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > carl.d.soren...@gmail.com writes: > >> On 2010/08/14 19:47:59, Neil Puttock wrote: >>> Since these are bound with defaults above, you don't need to use >> chain-assoc-get >> >>> (radius size) >> >> Done. I forgot about how nifty the new interface is that David made >> possible. > > Actually, the niftiness is due to Nicolas and was there before my > changes, but > > a) restricted to Lilypond-internal markup functions (which the woodwinds > now are, so they could already have used this). > > b) basically undocumented, partly justifiable because the functionality > was not user-accessible anyway. > > And I am not all too sure that b) is much better than previously. I > just noticed that the documentation says > > If the command uses properties from the PROPS arguments, the > `#:properties' keyword can be used, to specify which properties are > used, and their default values. > > and there is no mention whatsoever of the property symbols being bound > to the respective property in the function body. > > In short: the documentation would not have helped you remember the > niftiness which you forgot.
This may be so, but even if the documentation were there I would probably have missed it, because when I first learned user-defined markups, I learned to do the chain-assoc-get from props. And so I just had old habits. > > Since it was me that moved the niftiness into user-accessible and thus > to-be-documented realms, that is my fault. > > Sorry. I'll commit a fix soonish. > I don't see any fault to be assigned. But I do agree that some improved documentation (probably in Extending) would be useful. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel