Le 16 mars 2009 16:31, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> a écrit : > I don't think anybody else has replied, so I'll take a stab at it.
I've been working at a draft reply for a few days, but never found what I was looking for. > What about reserving \< \> \! **only** for hairpins, and \cr > \endCr \dim \endDim **only** for text? ok, we'd need extra > commands for decresc and decr, but this way we could avoid the > \crescTextXXX stuff entirely. Yes. Yes. Yes. We certainly need that. > Again, I'd rather use text for text dynamics. What about \cresc > #"cresc. poco a poco" ? i.e. if \cresc is used by itself, it > prints "cresc.", but if you provide the optional argument, that's > used instead of the default text? Yes, but I'd really like to use this \cresc command of yours *after* the note (not before, as it is now). > This is the sticking point in my mind. Are you able to modify it > yourself (including Carl's help in "yourself")? If so, then we > can have a long discussion about the new dynamic syntax. I'd > encourage you to experiment with changing the parser before we > get into lots of details about the new syntax, though. The parser can certainly be rewritten (like Reinhold did for \tempo). However, I think we can take advantage of the (make-music ('DynamicEvent ('tweaks ('text "")))) trick that you've been using (and so have I). The only drawback for now is that you can't specify a string as an argument without using a music function : instead of a'\cresc #"my text" you have to first define a make-dyn-from-this-text function, and then predefine your text: crescMyText = #(make-dyn-from-this-text "my text") and only then use a'\crescMyText Whereas with a music function, you can simply do: \cresc #"mytext" a' ... but then again, the command has to be used *before* the note and this has many drawbacks (plus a big deal of inconsistency through the code, that i can tell: see for instance http://repo.or.cz/w/opera_libre.git?a=blob;f=definitions/text-functions.ly#l178 -- or, line 300, the awful mess with text spanners...) Which is why, rather than a C++ parser change, what I'd really like to have is a (define-music-tweak) function, that could act like define-music-function but that would *not* take the music as an argument, that would just take the string and cons' it as a 'tweak property. Regards, Valentin _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel