Re: Provide \hide and \omit functions for transparent and void glyphs(issue 6575048)

[Trevor Daniels]

David Kastrup wrote Saturday, September 29, 2012 4:47 PM


> Marc Hohl <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> Am 29.09.2012 11:01, schrieb David Kastrup:
>>> Marc Hohl <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>> Am 28.09.2012 17:40, schrieb address@hidden:
>>>>>> hmm... not quite perfect.
>>>>>> No other idea, though...
>>>>> \here misses the relation to the next item (not that \single is much
>>>>> better).  \directly was nicer in that regard.  \next would possibly also
>>>>> work.
>>>> Having to choose between \single and \next, I would take \next.
>>> After thinking this over, I realized what worries me about \next: next
>>> is a loop control command in a number of different languages like awk,
>>> perl, Python.
>> ... or think about TeX ;-)
>>>   It is also frequently used for linked list pointers.  All
>>> of those common uses in computing are quite grammatically different in
>>> their usage.
>> But on the other hand, we talk about usability, and I am not quite sure
>> that *every* user thinks Perl/Python/TeX when he or she writes Lilypond.
>> And \next seems to be more self-explanatory than \single (at least to
>> me, it is).
> 
> I am not convinced.  Unless I see either a new proposal that I feel I
> can get behind myself, or more prominent public support for one of the
> numerous existing proposals including \next, I am going to stick with
> \single.
> 
> Since by far the easiest time to press a change is before a first
> version is installed, people should speak up now if they feel that
> <c' \next \easyHeadsOn e' g'> is significantly better than
> <c' \single \easyHeadsOn e' g'> for changing just the head on e', or if
> they think they have another good name.

I prefer \single to \next.

\justOne \onlyOne ?

Trevor