Re: adding hideKeySignature to lilypond commands

[Graham Percival]

On 3-Aug-05, at 11:44 PM, Sven Axelsson wrote:

> > To make lilypond bagpipe stuff easier, I propose that we include these
> > commands in ly/property-init.ly
>
> Actually doing that would not make the bagpipe stuff easier at all.

*cough*  I was politic'ing.  (not a real English word :)

> I currently have those commands in my bagpipe.ly file where they
> also set the key-signature-to-be-hidden by calling
>   \set Staff.keySignature = #'((0 . 2) (3 . 2))

> If the commands were moved elsewhere I would be forced to use a
> different name, and I don't really want that since hideKeySignature
> is exactly the right name even if it also silently sets the key
> signature.

Our Fearless Leader will object to this, probably using dire phrases 
like
"polluting the global LilyPond namespace" and "creating future
support nightmares".  What happens in six months when we
decide to add hideKeySignature to the general lilypond commands?

> Keeping these commands in bagpipe.ly would ensure that we don't clash
> with anything else. We can then assume that anyone who includes
> bagpipe.ly do want to write bagpipe music and that they are fine with
> the "hidden" behaviour of also setting the key signature.

I don't think we want *any* hidden behaviour -- especially when it's
not needed.  What's wrong with using
bagpipeHideKeySignature
?  ok, it's a bit longer to type; we could figure out a shorter name.

bagpipeHideKeySignature={
  \hideKeySignature
  \set Staff.keySignature = #'((0 . 2) (3 . 2))
}

Cheers,
- Graham