Quoting Mats Bengtsson:
Quoting Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> We have lots of optional constructs in the syntax, { c } is actually
>> a short-cut for \book{\score{\new Staff{\new Voice{ c }}}} (maybe I
>> missed something).
> yes, you can add a \new Score inbetween also, and empty layout and
> header blocks.
>> I think this is one major source of confusion but of course it's also
>> convenient. My personal view is that we should make at least some of
>> these parts compulsory again (especially \score), since it really
>> only saves a significant portion of key-strokes when you write an
>> example file with one or two bars, but not really for any real music.
>
> I think the shorthand without score is highly relevant:
> - Lots of music is just short snippets. See e.g. regression tests, LSR
> and bug archive.
I agree that we shouldn't force people to remember lots of extra syntax
that the program itself can figure out. However, I've seen lots of
confusion on the mailing list because \score is now optional.
This is Carl speaking:
I think that it's fine to have { c } as an easy-to-use syntax. However,
somewhere in the documentation it ought to mention what { c } will
expand to, when the defaults are put in.
That simple explanation (including the empty layout and header blocks)
would greatly help me understand the content of a lilypond file.
Carl Sorensen
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
