\fake and \broken are concise but "feel" wrong, implying something's
wrong with something else but the name doesn't describe it.

I think a function name where we've got to resort to being clever maybe
indicate we're trying to solve the wrong problem: we're trying to make
the name short at the expense of descriptiveness. Brevity is good, but a
top-level LilyPond function name has to describe what it does reasonably
accurately.

Wow, talking about wormholes, does this mean we could think of
properties like Slur.EventHorizon or Slur.GravityWell :-) ? I understand
even less about electrical engineers as they aren't cool enough for
their techno-babble to make it into Sci-Fi.

Let's maybe invent a descriptive function name like \slurInRepeat.

If the design needs it at both ends of the repeated block you could
consider a single keyword parameter for the function,
o \slurInRepeat #'begin - to appear at the end of the block and indicate
you're starting a new, partial slur and
o \slurInRepeat #'complete - to appear at the beginning of the block and
indicate you need to generate the rest of of the slur.

This would also fit better with the current set of \slur* commands which
are basically slur property setter commands e.g. \slurDotted \slurUp
\slurSolid.

Cheers Ian



https://codereview.appspot.com/7424049/

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Reply via email to