\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