Jacques Menu <jacques.m...@tvtmail.ch> writes: > Hello Folks, > > I'm rather new to Lily, and I don't have any cons/pro arguments about > this change. > > After reading the various reactions, a question : why not augment the > language with a new keyword? > Could be \relativeanchored or something, and would avoid the need for > doc, snippets and existing user files changes.
The idea was to reduce the number of choices to make for developers and users. Offering a reasonable canonical way of doing things is better for that than adding more options without preference. Most of existing user files do not _need_ changing to continue working as before. Similarly, most of the existing LilyPond code base (excepting the small amount of code tackled by the conversion rules of issue 3231) would not need changing in order to continue working. Changing it makes sense when it reduces the amount of complexity users and developers have to deal with. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user