Re: accidental.ly regtest

[Dmytro O. Redchuk]

On Tue 14 Dec 2010, 12:29 Phil Holmes wrote:
> "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote in message
> news:address@hidden
> >"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >>Well - because it's unusual.  Far more common to have a sharp on a
> >>natural note in the key sig, or a natural on a flat, for example.
> >
> >And a regtest should not test unusual things?
> >
> >I still fail to see why.
> 
> It's not actually testing the use of a natural-sharp in a flats key
> sig. It's testing the display of accidentals on the subsequent
> notes.  My reason for suggesting changing it is that, if you've
> limited exposure to all forms of music, and you're looking at this
> test to see if it's working properly, then you may concentrate on
> the unusual aspect of the flat-to-sharp change, and miss an error
> elsewhere.
I would agree.

Well, i was trying to remember what is current defaults for extra naturals,
then to guess whether this relates to extra naturals or not at all... Why?

I fail to see why this test (accidental.ly) would be less valuable if there
would be "\key c \major", let's say.

-- 
  Dmytro O. Redchuk
  Bug Squad