Re: Make Grob::name accessible to Scheme (issue 203090043 by address@hidden)

[dak]

On 2015/02/16 13:46:29, david.nalesnik wrote:
> On 2015/02/16 07:56:10, dak wrote:
> > On 2015/02/15 19:54:19, david.nalesnik wrote:
> > > Please review.  Thanks!
> >
> > "Needing to determine the name of a grob" should actually rarely be
necessary:
> > the pervasive information connected to the functionality of a grob
is rather
> its
> > interfaces.  That's the usual criterion for deciding whether to deal
with a
> > particular grob.  Relaying on the name makes it harder to create
variants of
> > existing grobs.

> I see what you are saying.  I'm aware that grob recognition takes
place through
> interfaces, and that the user could use grob::has-interface.  (This
does lead to
> awkwardness when, for example, you want a NonMusicalPaperColumn, since
there is
> no nonmusical-paper-column-interface.)

> There are uses for the name of a grob, say for inclusion in text.

Yes, debugging is clearly useful.
>   Also,
> ly:context-grob-name and ly:engraver-make-grob accept a name as
argument.

Also quite definitely useful as argument here.

> This function would one of a group: ly:context-name,
ly:translator-name, and
> ly:font-name.

Well, font-name likely returns a string, and I guess we rather want the
symbol when talking about ly:engraver-make-grob.  There are clearly good
reasons for having the function.  But I do expect to see uses that will
need to get revised eventually.

https://codereview.appspot.com/203090043/