On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 12:20:19AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com writes:
Treating the first pitch of \music in \relative \music differently is
not intuitive and will likely result in octave errors.
Treating the first pitch of \music in \relative is
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 12:20:19AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com writes:
Treating the first pitch of \music in \relative \music differently is
not intuitive and will likely result in octave errors.
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 9:34 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 12:20:19AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
So the first pitch will _always_ be special-cased. With a reference
pitch, it is special-cased to refer to
Regards,
Wim.
On 9 Mar 2013, at 05:45 , Keith OHara wrote:
Colin Hall colinghall at gmail.com writes:
In my early days with Lilypond I learned this to my cost. I've never
used \relative since then.
I stopped using \relative about a year ago, because absolute note
entry is
vastly
Evan Driscoll edrisc...@wisc.edu writes:
On 3/9/2013 7:31 PM, Jim Long wrote:
So if somehow I've made two consecutive correct postulates,
wouldn't a user who used the mnemonic:
If no reference pitch is given, then the first pitch after
\relative is relative to f
...
So, addressing
Wim van Dommelen m...@wimvd.nl writes:
Agree, we should have an easy way to switch from absolute to relative
(Yes, everthing inside \relative { } is relative, all other is
absolute, I know), like: \absolute: from here on everything is
absolute like \clef bass tells me: from here on display
Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com writes:
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 11:40:14AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Well, the new mnemonic would be first pitch after \relative is
absolute
I'm not sure whether this is profound or profane, so please
excuse, but
For just the case of \relative
On 10 Mar 2013, at 10:06 , David Kastrup wrote:
Wim van Dommelen m...@wimvd.nl writes:
Agree, we should have an easy way to switch from absolute to relative
(Yes, everthing inside \relative { } is relative, all other is
absolute, I know), like: \absolute: from here on everything is
absolute
On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Paul Morris wrote:
On Mar 9, 2013, at 10:05 PM, Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com wrote:
I would rather not have convert-ly change any use of \relative with an explicit
reference pitch.
That was my thought too. Of course it would be possible, but since there would
be
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Wim van Dommelen m...@wimvd.nl wrote:
On 10 Mar 2013, at 10:06 , David Kastrup wrote:
Barely tongue-in-cheek:
absolute =
#(define-music-function (parser location music) (ly:music?)
(make-music 'TransposedMusic 'element music))
When placed inside of a
Wim van Dommelen m...@wimvd.nl writes:
melody = { \relative c='4 d e f g f e d c \absolute c,, d,, e,, f,,
g,, \relative c=' d e f }
Executive summary: that's an unmaintainable nightmare. If you don't
care about reading technical rants, you might as well stop reading now.
The { } only wrap
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Wim van Dommelen m...@wimvd.nl wrote:
Compared with the \clef behaviour, I see this variant:
melody = { \relative c='4 d e f g f e d c \absolute c,, d,, e,, f,,
g,, \relative c=' d e f }
I think this may be
:)
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 11:10 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Wim van Dommelen m...@wimvd.nl wrote:
Compared with the \clef behaviour, I see this variant:
melody = { \relative c='4 d e f g f e d c
Paul Morris p...@paulwmorris.com writes:
b) should convert-ly make user code walk through that door once?
Hmmm... If people have been using an explicit reference pitch,
nothing changes in that case.
The proposed convert-ly rule of issue 2329 converts everything it can
interpret (which is
Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com writes:
I think 'recommended' is going too far. At least, I can't see
that one is always or nearly always better than the other. David
made some examples of when the proposal could be better,
Not really. I just went into the Learning manual (intended for
On 03/10/2013 03:50 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
The problem I have with talking much about \relative f is that f seems
arbitrary. However, maybe an explanation linking both of these concepts
and explaining how f is arrived at will allow both views to coexist.
That's what I was trying to get at
On Mar 10, 2013, at 10:22 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The proposed convert-ly rule of issue 2329 converts everything it can
interpret (which is the majority) to argumentless \relative. This
conversion is needed for converting the LilyPond code base, and it
should be available to
Evan Driscoll drisc...@cs.wisc.edu writes:
On 03/10/2013 03:50 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
The problem I have with talking much about \relative f is that f seems
arbitrary. However, maybe an explanation linking both of these concepts
and explaining how f is arrived at will allow both views
Hello Folks,
I'm rather new to Lily, and I don't have any cons/pro arguments about this
change.
After reading the various reactions, a question : why not augment the language
with a new keyword?
Could be \relativeanchored or something, and would avoid the need for doc,
snippets and existing
Jacques Menu jacques.m...@tvtmail.ch writes:
Hello Folks,
I'm rather new to Lily, and I don't have any cons/pro arguments about
this change.
After reading the various reactions, a question : why not augment the
language with a new keyword?
Could be \relativeanchored or something, and
Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net writes:
Colin Hall colinghall at gmail.com writes:
In my early days with Lilypond I learned this to my cost. I've
never used \relative since then.
I stopped using \relative about a year ago, because absolute note
entry is vastly easier.
Well, then both
Shane Brandes sh...@grayskies.net writes:
It's funny. I think i have used \absolute maybe three times. It is too
much extra typing.
We don't even _have_ \absolute... And you'll be hard put to specify the
reference pitch for \relative in anything but absolute mode.
--
David Kastrup
Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com writes:
I have mixed feelings regarding the proposed syntax update of
\relative.
Treating the first pitch of \music in \relative \music differently is
not intuitive and will likely result in octave errors.
Treating the first pitch of \music in \relative
Il 07/03/2013 20:06, David Kastrup ha scritto:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch.
I like this idea, as it makes the input a bit cleaner.
For those of us who are used to the old way,
Hi,
this suggestion might take the crown of the most discussed change away
from the treble clef touchup - i'm impressed :)
Anyway, i see the situation as follows:
- most of us consider changing the behaviour of \relative {} (without
explicit reference pitch) a good idea,
- we (i.e. user
Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com writes:
Il 07/03/2013 20:06, David Kastrup ha scritto:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch.
I like this idea, as it makes the input a bit cleaner.
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
this suggestion might take the crown of the most discussed change away
from the treble clef touchup - i'm impressed :)
Well, easy if it's an extensive change proposed by a quarrelsome
blockhead having nothing to do with his time except working on
I don't really have a good idea how some kind of voting process would
look like where we get relevant feedback from a substantial number of
non-specialists.
FWIW, speaking as a Lilypond user with some programming experience (but who
is not a LP developer) -- I was skeptical of the change at
Am 09.03.2013 07:04, schrieb Matthew Collett:
On 9/03/2013, at 12:22 am, Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com wrote:
2013/3/8 Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org:
David Kastrup writes:
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
+1
+1 , I was
David Kastrup wrote Saturday, March 09, 2013 10:40 AM
So far, the response has been quite a mixed bag. So here is how I think
we may proceed on this.
a) stop any further use of the current \relative { ... }
That's issue 3231.
b) Implement new proposed behavior for \relative { ... }.
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 12:20 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com writes:
I have mixed feelings regarding the proposed syntax update of
\relative.
Treating the first pitch of \music in \relative \music differently is
not intuitive and will likely
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking of which, I believe I am struggling with music entry notation
versus music storage: writing in relative pitch is often easier for note
entry, but absolute pitches are IMHO better suited for storing music. I may
Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 12:20 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
[...]
Personally I think that
c'' \relative { ... }
is more intuitive than
\relative c'' { ... }
music functions don't look
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking of which, I believe I am struggling with music entry notation
versus music storage: writing in relative pitch is often easier for note
entry, but absolute pitches
On 03/09/2013 06:26 AM, James Harkins wrote:
I don't really have a good idea how some kind of voting process would
look like where we get relevant feedback from a substantial number of
non-specialists.
FWIW, speaking as a Lilypond user with some programming experience (but who
is not a LP
On Sat, 9 Mar 2013, Paul Scott wrote:
On 03/09/2013 06:26 AM, James Harkins wrote:
I don't really have a good idea how some kind of voting process would
look like where we get relevant feedback from a substantial number of
non-specialists.
FWIW, speaking as a Lilypond user with some
On Mar 9, 2013, at 4:47 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
So that's the next step: opening the door on \relative { } again, or rather a
different door with the same door handle.
Interesting discussion. I like the new/proposed behavior for \relative { ... }
(without reference pitch),
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 4:35 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Olivier Biot olivier.b...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thinking of which, I believe I am struggling with music entry notation
versus music storage: writing
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 11:40:14AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Well, the new mnemonic would be first pitch after \relative is
absolute
I'm not sure whether this is profound or profane, so please
excuse, but
For just the case of \relative WITHOUT a reference pitch:
I. Am I correct that
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 12:22:59PM +0100, Francisco Vila wrote:
I was currently using \relative f { } anyway, so this would
allow removing the f, leaving the {...} intact, which for me would
imply a smooth transition to the new behavior.
I had a feeling my observation wasn't original. Also,
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 12:49:31PM -0500, Paul Morris wrote:
As someone mentioned, it might be helpful to explain things in
the docs something like the following: If there is no explicit
reference pitch, the first note defaults to being relative to f
Yet another death knell to my earlier
On 3/9/2013 7:31 PM, Jim Long wrote:
So if somehow I've made two consecutive correct postulates,
wouldn't a user who used the mnemonic:
If no reference pitch is given, then the first pitch after
\relative is relative to f
...
So, addressing those who are put off by a perceived mixing
On Mar 9, 2013, at 10:05 PM, Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com wrote:
I would rather not have convert-ly change any use of \relative with an
explicit reference pitch.
That was my thought too. Of course it would be possible, but since there would
be no change to the usage of explicit reference
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes:
Hi everyone,
I haven't read all posts on this subject, so sorry should I write
something that's already been written.
Why not keep the \relative pitch { music } syntax as one supported
way and simply change the \relative { music } syntax to what
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013, at 09:06 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes:
Hi everyone,
I haven't read all posts on this subject, so sorry should I write
something that's already been written.
Why not keep the \relative pitch { music } syntax as one
David Kastrup writes:
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
+1
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl
Am 07.03.2013 20:21, schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
One rationale is to stop the distribution of the information for
the first pitch to potentially quite separate places, like being
able to write
\new Staff \relative {
\key aes \major
% Voice one
{ c''2 aes4. bes8 }
...
instead of
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes:
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013, at 09:06 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Robert Schmaus robert.schm...@web.de writes:
Hi everyone,
I haven't read all posts on this subject, so sorry should I write
something that's already been written.
Why not keep the
David Kastrup writes:
Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl writes:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it
will sound
Colin Hall colingh...@gmail.com writes:
David Kastrup writes:
Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl writes:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note
Well... if you just don't emit the warning if the first pitch in a
\relative {} block is incorrect, then it seems like you get exactly
the current proposal except that you have to spell \relative { c''
} as \relative { c='' } instead.
I like that idea!
Indeed, this has some benefits in
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
Well... if you just don't emit the warning if the first pitch in a
\relative {} block is incorrect, then it seems like you get exactly
the current proposal except that you have to spell \relative { c''
} as \relative { c='' } instead.
I like that idea!
2013/3/8 Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org:
David Kastrup writes:
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
+1
+1 , I was currently using \relative f { } anyway, so this would
allow removing the f, leaving the {...} intact, which for me would
Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com writes:
2013/3/8 Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org:
David Kastrup writes:
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
+1
+1 , I was currently using \relative f { } anyway, so this would
allow removing the
Thomas Morley address@hidden writes:
2013/3/7 David Kastrup address@hidden:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
To be absolutely clear, am I right that this patch will not affect the
use of \relative with a given
2013/3/8 Klaus Föhl klaus.fo...@uni-giessen.de:
I am somewhat unhappy with the concept behind the new default use
being \relative {...} without qualifier as it mixes absolute and relative
pitch writing within the bracket. At least as it is explained.
I am not sure it mixes absolute and
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:43 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes:
Well... if you just don't emit the warning if the first pitch in a
\relative {} block is incorrect, then it seems like you get exactly
the current proposal except that you have to spell
Colin Hall colinghall at gmail.com writes:
In my early days with Lilypond I learned this to my cost. I've never
used \relative since then.
I stopped using \relative about a year ago, because absolute note entry is
vastly easier.
When writing, I do not generally remember the previous note
It's funny. I think i have used \absolute maybe three times. It is too
much extra typing.
Shane
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
Colin Hall colinghall at gmail.com writes:
In my early days with Lilypond I learned this to my cost. I've never
used
Greetings All,
In truth, I am quite satisfied with the current state of
\relative, whether with or without an absolute pitch indicated before
the braces. And yes, I do understand that, though users are at present
discouraged from using the latter, both
\relative c' { MUSIC } and \relative {
On 9/03/2013, at 12:22 am, Francisco Vila paconet@gmail.com wrote:
2013/3/8 Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org:
David Kastrup writes:
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
+1
+1 , I was currently using \relative f { } anyway, so
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3229
It's clear that this change will require quite a bit more work if it
gets accepted, and it is important that we get user
One rationale is to stop the distribution of the information for
the first pitch to potentially quite separate places, like being
able to write
\new Staff \relative {
\key aes \major
% Voice one
{ c''2 aes4. bes8 }
...
instead of the previous
\new Staff \relative c'' {
I believe this approach, especially for new users, is less abstract
than defining a 'syntactic' octave position before entering real
music. I think it's a good idea.
Jethro
Werner LEMBERG (07 Mar 2013 @ 20:21)
One rationale is to stop the distribution of the information for
the first pitch
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3229
It's clear that this change will require quite a bit more work if it
gets accepted,
2013/3/7 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
To be absolutely clear, am I right that this patch will not affect the
use of \relative with a given pitch like
\relative d' { ... }
?
Then yes,
Thomas Morley thomasmorle...@googlemail.com writes:
2013/3/7 David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
To be absolutely clear, am I right that this patch will not affect the
use of \relative
Werner wrote Thursday, March 07, 2013 7:21 PM
For me, everything which leads to a better structure is a good thing,
so I support this change.
So do I.
Trevor
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 11:06 AM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3229
I wholeheartedly support this change.
Regards,
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 8:06 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it
will sound as fis''
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 08:06:24PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it
will sound as fis''
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:27:27PM +0100, Janek Warcho?? wrote:
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 8:06 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if
David Kastrup writes:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3229
How do people feel about this?
The \relative feature works just fine.
My preference is to leave
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it
will sound as fis'' (absolute pitch).
I wouldn't mind, if I can still use the the
I would prefer not to use the new concept of relative. It seems
awkward when a piece does not begin on a tonic it shifts the gamut in
a less useful way.
Shane
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Martin Tarenskeen
m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 12:37:55AM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it
will sound as
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 8:06 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note
Jim Long lilyp...@umpquanet.com writes:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:27:27PM +0100, Janek Warcho?? wrote:
Also, what would happen if someone used q as the first thing after
initial chord?
No change. q works by repeating the pitches, not by replaying
the input syntax. Otherwise even the
Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl writes:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it
will sound as fis'' (absolute
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 08:06:24PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note
Colin Hall colingh...@gmail.com writes:
David Kastrup writes:
Please take a look at
Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as
an absolute one
URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3229
How do people feel about this?
The \relative feature
On 3/7/2013 9:57 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
That's a real tough test... Asking someone who has just managed to get
along with one convention to move to the next one. Perhaps you should
take this opportunity for asking someone who has not yet started working
with LilyPond.
Well I don't quite
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 06:29:34AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
Whereas keeping the explicit initial pitch:
\relative c' { c' c' }
the c' outside the {} means middle C
each c' inside the {} means jump an octave higher
Not every piece
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:52:21PM -0600, Evan Driscoll wrote:
Well... if you just don't emit the warning if the first pitch in a
\relative {} block is incorrect, then it seems like you get exactly the
current proposal except that you have to spell \relative { c'' } as
\relative { c='' }
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 12:37:55AM +0100, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an
explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference
pitch. That is, if the first note
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 06:29:34AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
Whereas keeping the explicit initial pitch:
\relative c' { c' c' }
the c' outside the {} means middle C
each c' inside the
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 06:29:34AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
Whereas keeping the explicit initial pitch:
\relative c' { c' c' }
the c' outside the
Hi everyone,
I haven't read all posts on this subject, so sorry should I write
something that's already been written.
Why not keep the \relative pitch { music } syntax as one supported
way and simply change the \relative { music } syntax to what David
proposed? I myself have always only used the
88 matches
Mail list logo
