Simon Bailey <si...@bailey.at> writes: > James, > > On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 10:56 AM, James <pkx1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> there's a few things which are only documented in the learning manual. :) >>> >>> >> Actually I would change that last sentence to read: >> >> There's a few things which are not documented in the Learning Manual. >> >> And this is a deliberate decision. If not, it's still a good decision. > > i realised my mistake almost as soon as i pressed send. the link i > sent is to the NR and there's an amazing amount of information not > covered in the LM. Correctly so. > >> I don't see q as being needed in the Learning Manual as a good thing; apart >> from all the discussion how 'q' is a rather arbitrary 'command' - why 'q'? >> what does 'q' stand for etc., not knowing q doesn't lose you any >> functionality (i.e. there is nothing that q does that you cannot already do >> with the 'correct' syntax) but there are limitations using q - which >> are/should be documented in the Notation Reference. > > two i can think of: > - it can't be quoted (at least i haven't found the correct event to > quote yet)
I think that this will be fixed as a side effect of <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3810>. > - it can't be altered with relative octave-switch commands Well, it would be so weird behavior in a \relative section that I'm actually glad about that. Why would you even want to do that? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
