Jay Anderson wrote Monday, April 06, 2009 2:50 AM
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote:
as long as I have anything to do with LilyPond, I will veto
changes
like this that introduce inconsistent whitespace handling in the
syntax. Please come up with something different. I think the
idea
to use (for example) & as a place holder is much more sane.
OK. Then I vote for a letter like `q' as a repeater for chords.
`&'
is a bit cumbersome to type.
I think I would also prefer an alphabetic character also. Note and
rest names only include these characters already so for
consistency's
sake this new 'repeat note' should also. Also after thinking about
it
a bit '&' and similar characters would make some scores look even
more
like line noise:
<c e g>4 &2->\f &4
<c e g>4 q2->\f q4
The 'q' version to my eyes is a bit easier to read.
As I do little note entry myself I don't have a view
on the merits of q vs &, but there is another issue to
consider. If the base chord being repeated contains
tweaks, fingering, etc, are these to be repeated too?
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
