Re: music function to be included somewhere in scm/*

[Alexander Kobel]

Hi all,

On 2016-12-16 19:13, Knut Petersen wrote:
> Hi Paul, Alexander et. al!
>
> I need to be very short as a rehearsal is waiting.

same here - I was and still am busy with pre-christmas performances.

> I'd advocate to keep minimum-length.

I second the vote for collapse-length.

(I agree with you that minimum-length is not a bad name per se, but the 
meaning is different for spanners and extenders. For spanners, the 
description of the property and its functionality matched way better in 
the past, and users are more aware of that meaning. Now that extenders 
will be auto-generated, it's even more crucial than before that we avoid 
confusion.)

> I also need some way to force an extender and to inhibit extender
> generation.
> Forcing an individual extender should overrule a general inhibition of
> extenders.
> Details can be hidden by some music functions ... but there's not time
> to generate a patch now.
>
> Have a look at the attached ly and the generated pdf ... and comment on the
> chosen names and syntax. It should be self-explanatory.

It is to me. Thanks.

Nevertheless, I guess we are at a point where we get an evaluation of 
the syntax and behavior by some people that have not been as involved in 
the feature development as we've been. I have a blind spot for any 
decisions on syntax as soon as I internalized what the engraving result 
will be.


Cheers,
Alexander