> Having never used lilypond, or played a musical instrument before.
This is an interesting starting point.
> To say the least, lillypond grammar is a nightmare.
Hmm.
> From a programmers point of view the cord notation is ok. The angle
> brackets wrap around the notes that are to be played.
> <e g>2.
>
> Beams do not follow this form however. The start of the beams is
> marked at the end of the first note it covers, and ends after the
> last note. For example :
> e8[ f g h]
> it might be more elegant and consistent to express it as :
> [e f g h]8
>
> The same applies to slurs
> c( d e) would become (c d e)
Early incarnations of lilypond did something similar. However,
experience has showed -- this is, typesetting a lot of scores -- that
a consistent postfix notation is far easier to typeset manually.
> Why \new Staff and not just \Staff?
The keyword `\new' creates something, while `\Staff' refers to it.
> The difficulty and inconsistent grammar
What's inconsistent? Contrary to other `programming' languages, only
angle brackets and braces are grouping elements, while brackets and
parentheses have a different usage.
Werner
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
