> On Aug 18, 2015, at 7:13 PM, Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I wonder if this function would better be defined in Scheme than C++. If >> someone wanted to do something like you're doing, it wouldn't be a trivial >> matter to first redo the function in Scheme to make the necessary changes. > > I'd love to see the KeySig-stencil in scheme in our code-base.
Me too. The more Scheme the better, IMHO and FWIW. As long as it makes sense to those who understand the trade offs, of course. (Not long ago I was looking at the C++ function that draws ledger lines (ly:ledger-line-spanner::print in ledger-line-spanner.cc), thinking about overriding it with a custom function. Well, I didn’t get very far… So I’ll have to look into David N.’s conversion work here. David N. if at any point you find yourself looking for another C++ to Scheme translation challenge, let me know!) -Paul _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
