Hello, I am only a user and very thankfull, both for ly and for relative. I would have had really thought much longer about ly if relative had not be available. Now, I understand the pro of absolute, and I think the solution is in the editors functionalities. If, let say Frescobaldi, would offer a preprocessor to translate a block from relative to absolute, this would be done. Relative is easy to write, absolute easy to read, so why choose? Both is better...
Cheers, Francois 2015-04-25 5:34 GMT-05:00, Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de>: > Am 25.04.2015 um 00:38 schrieb Thomas Morley: >> Hi all, >> >> I'm a little late to the party... >> >> One very annoying thing about \relative is when you want to use >> music-functions catching some music doing something with it. >> >> Here the less complex function I could think of, returning different >> results for absolute and relative. >> (It's only a show-case, the functionality could be achieved easily >> with other predefined commands, but I hope you'll get the point.) >> >> repeat-note = >> #(define-music-function (parser location music)(ly:music?) >> (make-sequential-music (list music (ly:music-deep-copy music)))) >> >> \absolute { c'1 \repeat-note c'' } >> \relative c' { c \repeat-note c'1 } > Well, either we require doing > > \version "2.19.17" > > repeat-abs-note = > #(define-music-function (parser location music)(ly:music?) > (let ((music #{ \absolute $music #})) > (make-sequential-music (list music (ly:music-deep-copy music))))) > > \absolute { c'1 \repeat-abs-note c'' } > \relative c' { c \repeat-abs-note c''1 } > > or we consider this a bug in (or enhancement request to) > (ly:music-deep-copy), towards which I’m inclined. > > Yours, Simon > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user