Re: Naming _another_ lacking puzzle piece

[Trevor Daniels]

Janek Warchoł wrote Saturday, October 13, 2012 3:46 PM

> As for command names, i'd prefer not to name them \pop and \push as
> this doesn't say anything to non-programmers.  To put it differently:
> i'd prefer to solve this problem in a way that doesn't require
> *creating new push and pop commands*.  But i have no idea if this is
> possible.
> 
> In other words, we have \override, \tweak, \set, \revert, \unset,
> \undo, \single (and maybe more).  It's getting confusing, at least for
> me.  I'd prefer to decrease the number of such functions, not increase
> them (without deleting functionality, of course).

Plus \once and now \temporary.  I agree this menagerie is going to be 
far more confusing to users than the occasional unexpected result after 
calling \crossStaff or \harmonicByFret - which no one has ever noticed. 
Users get quite confused enough with just \override, \revert, \set, \unset
and \tweak.

We're going too far in this direction now.

Trevor