[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
internals reference (was: tablature tie/slur)
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
internals reference (was: tablature tie/slur) |
Date: |
Fri, 29 Oct 2010 07:07:26 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 04:55:12PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> On 10/28/10 4:50 PM, "Valentin Villenave" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> > How about basic regrouping all engravers-related Scheme definitions in
> > a `define-scheme-engravers.scm' file, and then document it just like
> > music-functions.scm and define-markup-commands.scm, using (_
> > "localized doc strings"). Or is that too pedestrian?
>
> Well, as far as I can see, Scheme engravers are really engravers, so they
> ought to be documented in the IR along with the C++ engravers, not in an
> appendix of the NR along with Scheme functions.
Aye, but that's just a question of changing the IR-generating
scripts to look at .scm files in addition to .cpp files. Looks
like the entry point is
scm/documentation-generate.scm
AFAIK, right now we have absolutely zero knowledge of how the
Internals Reference is generated. That's not ideal, of course,
but it's a non-trivial task. I personally would budget 10 hours
of reading that scheme file, files included by that scheme file,
making small changes and rebuilding lilypond to see what happens,
etc, before claiming that I "understood" it.
OTOH, you might look at that and think "10 hours? that's
nothing"... or even "10 hours?! it's a 179-line scheme file, of
which 33 lines are comments. Understanding that is a 10-minute
task, not 10 hours!".
:)
In any case, I propose that we shelve this until 2.14 (maybe after
adding an Issue). The main candidates that I had in mind for this
kind of task are currently working on release-critical stuff.
That said, if somebody is particuarly interested in this idea...
especially since I suspect that it's actually a 1-hour task rather
than 10 hours... then by all means jump in. :)
Cheers,
- Graham
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Marc Hohl, 2010/10/20
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Carl . D . Sorensen, 2010/10/28
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Marc Hohl, 2010/10/28
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Carl Sorensen, 2010/10/28
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Valentin Villenave, 2010/10/28
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Carl Sorensen, 2010/10/28
- internals reference (was: tablature tie/slur),
Graham Percival <=
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Neil Puttock, 2010/10/29
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Marc Hohl, 2010/10/30
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Neil Puttock, 2010/10/30
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Marc Hohl, 2010/10/31
- Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Carl Sorensen, 2010/10/30
Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Marc Hohl, 2010/10/29
Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), tdanielsmusic, 2010/10/28
Re: Tablature: proper support for tie/slur- and tie/glissando-constellations (issue2191042), Carl . D . Sorensen, 2010/10/30