This is an update, rather than a "probable decision". I don't think we're close enough to have a real proposal.
http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_3.html At the moment I'm leaning towards using astyle+postprocessing. The script in question is here: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=blob;f=fix-astyle-fiddle.py;h=3bdffd9e8016b1d7fcdbe5cf5c77aecc09763d86;hb=refs/heads/dev/gperciva-astyle To test it yourself (if you're not familiar with git branches): 1. download, compile, and install astyle 2.02: http://astyle.sourceforge.net/ NOTE: astyle 2.02 is quite new (May 2011). It's not in your package manager. 2. download fix-astyle-fiddle.py (it "fiddles" with the output of astyle, to fix stuff) 3. run it on your favorite .hh or .cc file: python fiddle-astyle.py lily/percival-engraver.cc You could run it against everything by running fix-astyle-all.sh http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=blob;f=fix-astyle-all.sh;h=c5bf12959acac6ba8438551112280b3b8147e2b3;hb=refs/heads/dev/gperciva-astyle Suggestions are welcome (particularly for regex in python, because I don't think that this is the right place for map()), as are patches to improve the output. Most welcome of all would be a voiciferous objection to astyle. Or rather -- if you're going to complain later on, please do it sooner instead of later. I don't really know how much effort to put into fix-astyle-fiddle.py. If somebody has a great reason why we shouldn't use it (regardless of whatever postprocessing we have), then any effort spent on the postprocessing will be wasted. I'm hoping to have a firm proposal on Friday or Saturday, but whenever it happens, we'll have a full week for review and second thoughts. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel