I use conditionals to produce slightly different versions on paper and on MIDI files, and not having the --no-ps and --no-pdf would not block me, but it would make the process much longer, as engraving is much slower than MIDI file generation.
I let you decide whether this should count as an "objection" :-) Cheers, Darius Quoting Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > I know this feature has been requested & flamed before, but.. I think it > would > > be useful with a --no-midi option. The reason raised the previous request, > > > was that --no-midi would be time saving, which I agree isn't a very strong > > > reason by itself. But I have 3 more reasons: > > 1) It feels better to be able to control which files the lilypond script > (most > > command-line programs are that way). This would be useful if you are > invoking > > lilypond from a bash script, for example. > > 2) If lilypond-bin has annoying bugs in its midi output pass, e.g. <flame> > it > > crashes or spits out loads of unmotivated warnings </flame> :), then you > may > > want to disable that pass. > > 3) It looks good to have a --no-midi option, now that there are --no-ps and > > > --no-pdf options already (to me, those options seem to be about as > motivated > > as --no-midi, as they save about as much time & have a similar effect on > the > > output). > > I would vote to remove --no-pdf , --no-ps, -m, --no-paper and > --no-lily - they clutter the commandline interface. Any objections? > > As for the warnings: I have add support for MIDI \lyricsto with beams, > slurs & ties. > ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ _______________________________________________ Bug-lilypond mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
