Let me drop in some remarks: About me (you can skip this, if you want):
I'm a musician and music-teacher. The first 35 years of my life I wouldn't have known how to switch on a computer, but then I met my girl-friend. :) She used LilyPond and so I discovered LilyPond for myself. In the follwing years I used this great program. But I made the experience that not all features, needed for my own scores, were available. So what to do? Ask someone? Learn more? I choosed the second and decided to learn scheme (currently still improving it). Nowadays I'm able to write nearly all scheme-stuff I need, to answer numerous questions on the user-list, reporting bugs and work-arounds for them, etc. I set up LilyDev and recently submitted my first patch, struggling with the new world of developer-tools. Perhaps some day I'll decide to learn C++ Participating the Waltrup-meeting was a great experience: On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > Think about the Waltrop trip -- I think > that the most valuable parts were seeing each other, eating > together, talking about cross-cultural issues, looking at scores, > hearing about Janek and Rudolfo's typesetting work, our > conversation in the garden, etc. [...] +1 Reading this discussion so far, I sometimes feel not encouraged to continue my way of “learning more“. Well, of course there is sometimes an antagonism between the interests of users and developers. But I think the main points of a music-typesetting program are: (1)Deliver the most beautyful output as possible. (2)Offer the most simple or at least consequent syntax as possible for the user. In the end a musician will be the user, at least of the printed score. So I'm with Graham: 2012/9/3 Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca>: > I do not think that musicians have nothing valuable > to say. I *especially* do not agree that documentation writers or > teachers (in person) have nothing valuable to say. That said, now some thoughts ontopic: In most cases I'm quite fine with the current lily-syntax concerning the pre/post-commands. But there are cases I'd wish to be more consequent. Example: <c-1\2\rightHandFinger #2 g> Sometimes backslash, sometimes dash! Well, <c-1\2-\rightHandFinger #2 g'>1 works, too. But <c-1-\2-\rightHandFinger #2 g'>1 not. BTW, writing this post and looking for more examples I was surprised, that sometimes adding a dash to a post-command works already: c1-\startTextSpan f-\stopTextSpan or c-\glissando f Summarize: I'd vote for no extrem changes to the syntax, but to improve it slightly in a more consequent manner. Maybe it should be _possible_ to prepend a dash to every post-command. Concerning music-functions, I think we should keep the current behaviour. Music-functions mostly affect a larger section of music, appending them to any single event would be curious, except this _is_ the wanted behaviour: c-\parenthesize-| -Harm _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
