Comment #1 on issue 4371 by [email protected]: examples need explicit \relative
c'' {} to copy and paste correctly
https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4371
Well, \relative inside of \relative looks weird. But indeed, pasting
\relative into a \relative passage will work perfectly. As opposed to
leaving off the \relative invocation which will require adapting starting
pitch and after-ending pitch.
Similarly with extra { } : it's clutter you'd usually remove when pasting.
But there is no technical requirement for doing so and it is more likely
that things will actually go wrong when removing in some context than if
leaving them on.
So the rationale given here is mostly bogus. I'm not sure that this means
that the conclusion does not have other justifications. But as a gut
feeling, relative phrases without \relative specifier are maybe pitching a
bit short.
Maybe we could use the rule "if you could get the same result by placing in
some variant of \absolute, we may leave off"
So { c d f c } being short for { c'' d'' f'' c'' } would be acceptable while
{ c d g c, } as short for { c'' d'' g'' c'' } would not.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings
