Re: Naming _another_ lacking puzzle piece

[David Kastrup]

Keith OHara <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> "Trevor Daniels" <t.daniels <at> treda.co.uk> writes:
>> 
>> > I don't understand.  Are you suggesting we should not document
>> > these new functions?  If so, what is the set of commands which
>> > should be documented?
>> 
>> I am not suggesting that.  But there is public consent that documenting
>> them would be harmful to our users.  
>
> So we should
> Track the bug in \crossStaff and \harmonicByFret
> Repair these 2 music functions by using the correct push/pop Scheme functions
> Improve the naming of the make-grob-property-*
>
> In general, make more of the Scheme layer documented and accessible 
> *after* seeing a cases where it is useful.
>
> I looked for a case in my scores where I wanted a stack, where I wanted to
> temporarily override something that I had already overridden, and then put
> back my first override.  I did not find any.

It's basically the same use case as \once\override except that the
temporary change lasts for more than a single timestep.

You can always re-override to the preexisting value _iff_ you know it.
For input intended to be reused, knowing it is not always possible.

-- 
David Kastrup