Re: \defineBarLine is confusing

[Keith OHara]

Trevor Daniels <t.daniels <at> treda.co.uk> writes:

> The description of \defineBarLine in NR 1.2.5 does
> not make it clear that the parameter called bartype
> doubles as both the name of the barline being defined
> and the definition of the bar line to be used in
> the middle of the line (i.e. not at the beginning or
> the end.)  

> Why not "\defineBarLine normal end start span"?

I agree that the simple list of four arguments would be better.

I traced the history to find the discussion at the point where the
grouping was introduced:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg01031.html

I think there might be consensus to reverse that decision.
(I would raise a tracker issue, but maybe better to give it a day 
on the mailing list in case there is other input.)