My Dear David, At the time I started this thread I was 100% sure that you would answer something like this. ;) Well, let's try to see former version : http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/Documentation/essay/building-software, v2.14 says: "f4" compare to http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/essay/building-software, v2.19 says: "f'4" Why's that?...
2016-07-22 16:28 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > Pierre Perol-Schneider <pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Hi James, > > > > Sorry for the misunderstanding. > > Have you tried the snippet ? Have you seen the result ? > > > > It should be written : > > > > { <c' d' e'>4 } > > > > and not: > > > > <<c4 d4 e4>> > > > > Examples that follow should also be corrected. > > Well, "corrected" is a hard word: they work as written and intended. > The main question I see here is how we should treat "Essay": as an > authored essay that we only keep compilable, or as something where we > actually want to keep the _content_ tracking best _current_ practices. > > Is it an Urtext or do we not just keep it playable on current > instruments but rather let it make best use of the state of art? > > Bach has written keyboard works where keeping in spirit with the score > has required contortions and approximations on contemporary instruments > that became considerably more playable over time. As opposed to > historic LilyPond, historic players did not have the luxury of flatly > stating "syntax error" or "colliding notecolumns cannot be resolved", so > the historic essay had to make do with historic LilyPond rather than a > hypothetical idealization. > > Should we ask the authors? Or should we at least change that stuff > where one would say, as a current-day user of LilyPond, "ew, what?"? > > -- > David Kastrup > > _______________________________________________ > bug-lilypond mailing list > bug-lilypond@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond > _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond