Re: move some OLL functions to vanilla LilyPond? [was: A suggestion: add \rf to built-in dynamics]

2020-01-07 Thread Urs Liska
Am 7. Januar 2020 23:53:42 MEZ schrieb Andrew Bernard : >Hi Malte, > >\shapeII is a function I use heavily - heavily - in all my work. It's >indispensable for me at least. I'm very familiar with OpenLilyLib, and >contribute a bit to it, so it's not an issue for me, but that's a >function that r

Re: move some OLL functions to vanilla LilyPond? [was: A suggestion: add \rf to built-in dynamics]

2020-01-07 Thread Andrew Bernard
Hi Malte, \shapeII is a function I use heavily - heavily - in all my work. It's indispensable for me at least. I'm very familiar with OpenLilyLib, and contribute a bit to it, so it's not an issue for me, but that's a function that really ought to go into lilypond core in my view. As for newbies n

Re: move some OLL functions to vanilla LilyPond? [was: A suggestion: add \rf to built-in dynamics]

2020-01-06 Thread Urs Liska
4. Januar 2020 12:34, "Malte Meyn" schrieb: > Am 04.01.20 um 12:29 schrieb Malte Meyn: > >> But that brings me to another question: Shouldn’t we add the \dynamic > >> command from openlilylib to >> vanilla LilyPond? This would allow users to > have “p dolce”, “più f” and >> ‘exotic’ dynamics l

move some OLL functions to vanilla LilyPond? [was: A suggestion: add \rf to built-in dynamics]

2020-01-04 Thread Malte Meyn
Am 04.01.20 um 12:29 schrieb Malte Meyn: But that brings me to another question: Shouldn’t we add the \dynamic command from openlilylib to vanilla LilyPond? This would allow users to have “p dolce”, “più f” and ‘exotic’ dynamics like “mfz” whithout having to define extra commands using make-