Hi Carl,
You have pointed out something very interesting:
This is the the way I had written the nesting structure in my first message:
addKey = { \key c \major \time 4/4 }
\score {
\new StaffGroup
<<
\new Staff
<<
\set Staff.instrumentName = #"Superius "
\new Voice = "staffOne" << \addKey \staffOneNotes >>
\lyricsto "staffOne" \new Lyrics \staffOneWords
>>
\new Staff
<<
\set Staff.instrumentName = #"Contratenor "
\new Voice = "staffTwo" << \addKey \staffTwoNotes >>
\lyricsto "staffTwo" \new Lyrics \staffTwoWords
>>
>>
}
The LillyPond parser accepts this, there is no error, and the score _is
rendered correctly_.
But as you point out:
this:
<< \addKey \staffOneNotes >>
is better written as:
{ \addKey \staffOneNotes }
\score {
\new StaffGroup
<<
\new Staff
<<
\set Staff.instrumentName = #"Superius "
\new Voice = "staffOne" { \addKey \staffOneNotes }
\lyricsto "staffOne" \new Lyrics \staffOneWords
>>
\new Staff
<<
\set Staff.instrumentName = #"Contratenor "
\new Voice = "staffTwo" { \addKey \staffTwoNotes }
\lyricsto "staffTwo" \new Lyrics \staffTwoWords
>>
>>
}
While the { ... } notation is better, LilyPond accepts both: { \addKey
\staffTwoNotes } and << \addKey \staffTwoNotes >>. In this case both are
rendered the same.
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Learning-LilyPond-comments-invited-tp156969p157008.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
