Re: Issue 5740: Add \post to defer context actions to end of time step (issue 581600043 by address@hidden)

[nine . fierce . ballads]

On 2020/02/07 09:19:03, hanwenn wrote:
> On 2020/02/06 14:29:55, Dan Eble wrote:
> More code means more maintenance liability, so unless
> it either solves a problem, or it simplifies the existing system, it
would be a
> net negative. 

You're preaching to the choir.

> I would really like the problem defined before we try solving it.
[...]
> I hope I am not demoralizing you

It's a good thing you threw in that last part, because from over here it
was sounding rather like you resented my posting this for review.  I'll
try to keep my reply descriptive.

I have seen that mailing-list discussions on detailed design--even for
features people recognize they need, but especially for those they
don't--do not go far or fast.  I suppose it's because few people have
the level of familiarity, the current interest, or the time to devote to
written communication on those topics.  I'm not blaming them; it's just
my diagnosis.  Posting a review gives them something concrete to comment
on, and that gets a discussion going.

I have the sense that most of my successful contributions have gone this
way.  Is this approach as effective as one that might be taken by a
professional software development team?  No, but my code is in LilyPond.
 Are the factors that make this the most effective approach in this
context going to change?  Not likely.

> I hope I am not demoralizing you

Well, it's a dilemma: friction either way.  I spent an hour composing
this reasoned reply.  What I was hoping for was any of the following
kinds of feedback.  Looking past the little lecture on process, I see
some of them starting to come through; so, thank you.

1. pointers to potential applications (thanks, David et al.)
2. The implementation looks sane, but I can't think of a place we would
use this currently.  I think you should ping us when your experiments
with it are more mature.
3. I haven't looked at the implementation, but I can't think of a place
we would use this currently.  I think you should ping us when your
experiments are more mature. 
4. You can approximate this already with X; would that work for you?
5. Speaking as a user, I'm not sure where I'd apply this, but calling it
X would be more appropriate.
6. This is fantastic!  I've been working around not having this for
decades!

https://codereview.appspot.com/581600043/