Re: Suggestion: Keep original breaks

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 27.11.2013 16:36, schrieb Carl Sorensen:
>> On 11/27/13 8:32 AM, "Urs Liska" <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> For me this sounds good.
>>> Requiring to write \include "original-breaks.ly" is significantly better
>>> than requiring to define the commands.
>>> But it would still need a separate switch, presumably through the
>>> command line.
>> This is true, but it would be possible to put the appropriate command line
>> switch in Frescobaldi and to access it by means of a check box, right?
>
> Right, that's not the issue. We can pass command line options,
> expressions or include files from Frescobaldi (that's what we already
> do with the Layout Control Options).
> But we would have to make the commands in the include file respond to
> that switch, and IISC we'd be back at the specific use case that
> offended David.

So you are saying that your use case is impossible to do via tags?  Or
are we back to ad hominem attacks?

-- 
David Kastrup