On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:30 AM, <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > I must be in a controversial mood today since I feel like upholding the > idea. I had been thinking about it while fetching breakfast and eating > and was about to reenter discussion when I found that I had already > convinced you, so this is a bit awkward.
lol :) Actually, my cousin gave another reason to change \omit to something else: in his opinion omit implies \once in meaning. Like, \omit StringNumber sounds like only one StringNumber won't be printed. > The only drawback is that one might want \yes/\no as a pairing for some > different purpose. \no is really a rather important word. Yes, this is my concern, too. What about \delete ? Afaik it's not taken yet. On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Marc Hohl <m...@hohlart.de> wrote: > Am 28.09.2012 09:30, schrieb d...@gnu.org: >> And things like \once\no Clef also work reasonably well. The proposed >> "\single" is more awkward, but "\single\omit Clef" is not that much >> better, so maybe "\single" should change. > > I don't feel quite happy with \single either; just a spontaneous idea: > > does \here work? > > \here\EasyNoteHeadsOn c8 d e > > I'm not sure ... hmm... not quite perfect. No other idea, though... best, Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
