Re: Modularity in lilypond

[David Kastrup]

Mike Solomon <address@hidden> writes:

> Understood.  Does this modularity thing seem eventually includable in
> lilypond?  I'm finishing a piece for October 1 and would like to be
> consistent about the way that I do the coding for my graphical
> notation: either it'll be done in my git repository or as a module.
> Obviously I'd like not to have to change from one form to another
> afterwards, so if you think modularity seems like it could become part
> of lilypond, I'll tackle my project from that angle.

I don't have any say in that, but I would certainly welcome having to
look only at one place to understand one thing.  And this place should
include engravers, performers, properties and likely some ordering info
(specifying things like which related engravers should come before, and
which engravers afterwards in the order of things).

-- 
David Kastrup