Re: Issue 754: don't transpose generic property-setting music commands (issue 7303057)

[Keith OHara]

On Fri, 08 Feb 2013 01:20:59 -0800, <address@hidden> wrote:

> On 2013/02/08 08:40:29, dak wrote:
> > On 2013/02/08 04:46:27, Keith wrote:
> > > Yesterday's patch was better.
>
> > I beg to differ.  It did not address instrument definitions, or manual
> settings

Well, we had a nice plane for \instrumentSwitch,
and I did not think it wise to assume that the pitch should be protected in
  \set property = #(ly:make-pitch 0 -4 0)

I only said that patch was better; this patch is good enough.

> Concretely: can you show an example of not-just-academical LilyPond
> source that would be change to the worse with patch applied?
Nope.  I still encourage caution, because people use LilyPond for very academic 
projects.  Also, it is academically possible that some programmer will want to 
add a override-able property that is a pitch that should be transposed; he 
would need to find and understand this patch.

> Do you consider it sensible that values set via \override are transposed
> (but only if they are not set via a callback) while values set via
> \tweak aren't?
I have given it no thought.

> Can you see any internal use of \set/\override in LilyPond source (or
> the corresponding usage of PropertySet/OverrideProperty) that would now
> behave inappropriately under transposition?
No.

> https://codereview.appspot.com/7303057/