Re: Updating translators

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

Erik Sandberg schreef:
> First, I would prefer to make the second parameter of
> IMPLEMENT_TRANSLATOR the exact method identifier; i.e.,  somethign
> like
> IMPLEMENT_TRANSLATOR_LISTENER (Arpeggio_engraver, arpeggio_event);
> void Arpeggio_engraver::arpeggio_event (..)
>
> Second: Would it make sense to deviate from naming conventions, and
> name the listen method ArpeggioEvent, or should I rather perform some
> dirty trickery to generate the class name from a GNU-style string?
>
> I.e., should the listen method's name be
> Arpeggio_engraver::ArpeggioEvent
> or
> Arpeggio_engraver::arpeggio_event
> ?
>
> I imagine that the former could be easier to understand for a
> beginner; after all, the keyword arpeggio_event in C++ usually
> corresponds to symbol arpeggio-event
> in scheme, so with it may be difficult for a poor grepper to find out
> what's going on if strings are manipulated heavily under the hood.

Use C++ names in C++, and scheme names in scheme, i.e.

  Foo_bar::bla_bla

for handling a bla-bla-event.

--

Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

LilyPond Software Design
 -- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com