Re: Questions on re-organizing the woodwind (bass-)clarinet stencils

[David Kastrup]

Wim van Dommelen <address@hidden> writes:

> On 4 Feb 2013, at 09:44 , David Kastrup wrote:
>
>     First: consider the possibility of keeping an alias "four" to the
>     key,
>     but let code and documentation stick with side-ees.
>     
> I'll look into that.
>
>     Second: when doing such a change, it might be worth trying to cook
>     up a
>     rule for python/convertrules.py in order to let the syntax of
>     callers be
>     converted automatically.
>     
> Fair enough, I looked in this file for how to put in such a rule, but
> similar changes are answered with a "manual update".

Depends on who has been doing the rules.  There was a long trend of "we
don't mess with Scheme".  But you'll find that some of the more recent
rules (probably starting with those replacing ly:export) mess a _lot_
with Scheme.  Something like "find a balanced list of parens in an
assignment to xxx and replace every occurence of the word "four" in it
by side-ees" is actually not all that hard using some preexisting
functions as a building block for generating match strings.

> My aim with this email was also to find out how many people really use
> these diagrams.  If there are only very few (my guess, but that may be
> very wrong) it might not be worth the trouble of writing such a rule.

Depends on how much work it is.  Once something has been released in a
stable release, one can expect quite a number of users that you are not
going to hear anything from on these lists.  If a feature has only been
available in developer releases, breaking compatibility, in particular
for quite recent additions, is less of a concern.

-- 
David Kastrup