----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith OHara" <k-ohara5...@oco.net>
To: <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: Issue 879
Phil Holmes <mail <at> philholmes.net> writes:
\remove "Hara_kiri_engraver"
\consists "Hara_kiri_engraver"
I know I don't properly understand this stuff still, but doesn't the
\consists re-instate the previously removed engraver on the line above?
You are correct.
I looked at the history of the file containing this, using
<http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=tree>
and found that one change is titled:
"RemoveEmptyStaves: Remove Harakiri engraver before adding it again."
This reason is explained there. It is to avoid ever having two engravers
of the
same type, which caused problems.
This kind of detail often goes without comment in code, or at most a
3-word
"avoid having two", because there would otherwise be so many such
comments.
Thanks for pointing this out. I can't see a good reason for not adding the
comment to the file:
"If RemoveEmptyStaves is called twice, two Hara_kiri_engravers would be
added, which leads to a warning.
This code makes sure that no previous Hara_kiri_engraver is left before
adding a new one."
?
--
Phil Holmes
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
