Re: Add an example implementation of cross-staff stems (issue 5882053)

[James]

Hello,

On 24 March 2012 08:19,  <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 2012/03/23 21:46:41, Pavel Roskin wrote:
>>
>> OK, I'll use make-engraver in the next revision.  I guess I'll need to
>
> strip all
>>
>> Lilypond 2.14 compatibility stuff if this snippet is to be a part of
>
> the
>>
>> Lilypond documentation.
>
>
> In LilyPond itself, it makes sense to document the latest version.  If
> people read 2.16 documentation, they can't expect to see stuff that is
> guaranteed to work under 2.14.
>
> It is not uncommon for some new features to be only discernible from
> regtests.  That is not really good.  This is the current state for
> Scheme engravers.  It would be good to have some nice examples for
> Scheme engravers in the documentation.
>
> This particular case is, in my opinion, too complex for either
> documentation or a targeted regtest.  It is LSR material, or should
> become part of LilyPond proper if one can think of a good way.  Note
> that we have snippets in the LilyPond documentation/repository as well:
> those can use the newest features.  That would be the proper place, I
> think.
>
> We still need to get Scheme engravers into the main documentation.

We have this

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1995

We could incorporate 'Scheme stuff' via this. As I;ve always said,
although I don't understand this from a technical point of view if
someone can articulate what they want in text form I can do the
texinfo 'stuff' to get it in the doc.

I'm not sure if the NR is the correct place as opposed to a new @node
(or similar) in Extending or whatever.

James