Paul Morris <[email protected]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote >> I am leaning towards redefining >> >> clef = >> #(define-music-function (parser location type) ((string?)) >> (_i "Set the current clef to @var{type} if specified, >> or force a repetition of the current clef when @code{\\default} >> is given instead.") >> (if type >> (make-clef-set type) >> #{ \set Staff.forceClef = ##t #})) >> >> which then would allow using \clef \default. > > Good idea. Thinking about the wording, what about \clef \current > instead?
Not negotiable: > I see that \default already works here, although I don't know why. (I > couldn't find \default in the manuals.) <URL:http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/extending/scheme-function-usage> Yes, it's underrepresented in pretty much _all_ manuals. > One reason \current is clearer is that the "default" clef when a clef > is not specified is always the treble clef. Anyway, just something to > consider. We already have \key \default for a similar purpose. > Here's something else to consider. Should the following display the second > bass clef? > > { > \clef bass > c1 > \clef bass > c1 > } > > For example, I can see users asking "Why do I have to use \clef \default? > Why can't I just enter \clef bass again? Why doesn't \clef always display a > clef?" > > Hmmm... are there any cases where you'd want to enter \clef ... but > not display a clef? (I realize that changing this behavior would > entail more significant code changes than \clef \default.) \clef treble ... \repeat unfold 2 { \clef treble ... \clef bass ... } You don't want to see the treble clef in the first unfold of the repetition. Also instrument definitions may contain a clef. When invoking a particular instrument that happens to use the same clef as previously, you don't want to see a clef repetition. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
