Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes:
> On 7/31/17 8:08 AM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of David Kastrup"
> <lilypond-devel-bounces+c_sorensen=byu....@gnu.org on behalf of
> d...@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>Now the thing is that with the new change in place, we would not
>>necessarily _need_ different arguments: an integral multiplier larger
>>than 1 could be taken as a multi-measure rest count, like
>>
>>{1*4}
>>
>>So we likely _could_ get away with a single command: multipliers don't
>>seem to make much sense in the context of markup rests. I am not sure
>>that is a good idea, though. rest-markup would then have a convenient
>>way of its own to flag multimeasure rests while rest-by-number-markup
>>could not make use of it.
>
> I think that it is confusing to the user to have a multiplier be anything
> but a duration multiplier.
>
> We already have had problems with people thinking that
>
> r1*4
>
> is the same as
>
> \repeat unfold 4 {r1}
>
> If we go with this change on MMR, we will be reinforcing that
> misconception. It's some syntactic sugar that will make understanding
> more complex, IMO.
Ok, this sounds reasonable.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
