bug-lilypond
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Feature request: revert in another context


From: Simon Albrecht
Subject: Re: Feature request: revert in another context
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 23:16:05 +0100

On 28.11.2016 23:13, David Kastrup wrote:
Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:

On 28.11.2016 17:27, David Kastrup wrote:
Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> writes:

\version "2.19.49"
%{
It would be formidable if in such a case one wouldn’t need
to look up the default stencil procedure, but could use either
\undo or \revert.
Is this a valid/sensible feature request?
%}
\score {
    \new PianoStaff \with {
      \omit SystemStartBrace
      \accepts GrandStaff
    } <<
      \new GrandStaff \with {
        % those don’t work
        %\undo\omit SystemStartBrace
        %\revert SystemStartBrace.stencil
        % this does
        \override SystemStartBrace.stencil =
#ly:system-start-delimiter::print
      } <<
        \new Staff { 1 }
        \new Staff { 1 }
      >>
      \new Staff { 1 }
    >>
}
The context modification for GrandStaff does not have access to the
unmodified definition of the enclosing PianoStaff (it doesn't even have
access to the unmodified definition of GrandStaff and does not know that
it will get applied to a GrandStaff) and even if it did, how should it
guess that you want to undo PianoStaff settings rather than Score
settings?
OK, I’ll take that as a no. Or is it just that it would be complicated
to implement a behaviour matching my naïve expectation?
It would be complicated to give a sensible definition of your naïve
expectation.

If you wrote

     \undo \omit GrandStaff.SystemStartBrace

or the equivalent

     \revert GrandStaff.SystemStartBrace.stencil

in the music itself, you could not expect it to revert the settings of
PianoStaff .  So why do you expect it do do this in the context mod ?

Put another way: I want to prevent the ‘trickling down’, or inheriting of the property from the parent context. Maybe there should be a separate syntax for that?

Best, Simon



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]