carl.d.soren...@gmail.com writes:
> Thanks for taking this on, Janek.
>
> I don't know what the response will be to for_UP_and_DOWN(d). The last
> time somebody proposed a change, it was resisted because the do{}
> flip(d)!=UP idiom seemed simple enough to be acceptable.
>
> But I think the new idiom is more readable, and if there are no
> performance issues with it, I'd be in favor of it.
More like code size (I have not actually looked). But one could
consider using the flip idiom inside of the macro.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
