> I completely agree that we need a function that changes a property
> in a non-destructive way.
Me too, in case there was ever a doubt about this.
> If we were to completely re-design the lilypond language, I would
> suggest \override, \revert and \clear (as push, pop and clear
> stack), but they currently have a slightly different meaning.
Yes! This is what I wanted to point out, apparently with bad wording
which made David think into the wrong direction.
> The real problems we currently have are [...]
Thanks for this! I fully agree with all your reasoning.
Werner
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
