Hello, On 14 November 2011 14:38, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > On Nov 14, 2011, at 3:33 PM, Ian Hulin wrote: > >> Hi Mike, >> On 14/11/11 10:18, [email protected] wrote: >>> Hey all, >>> >>> I've answered a couple questions recently where >>> unpure-pure-containers have come in handy and think it'd be >>> beneficial to have some text in the notation manual about them. >>> However, understanding pure properties is scary for developers, so >>> I'd imagine that it'd be downright nightmarish for users. James - >>> would you be interested in helping me out with this? I think that >>> you're good at formulating things in a way that people understand. >>> >>> Cheers, MS >> Why are you using unpure rather than impure in the name? It make my >> internal spelling checker's alarm bells ring. >> >> Cheers, >> Ian >> > > I think because I wanted to express the notion of not-pure in a sort of > binary way (in my new jerseyan English, I have a tendency to use "un" for all > negation, so something's never bad, it's just ungood). "impure" to me sounds > like a term from the spanish inquisition or a novel by dostoyevsky. but i > can change it... >
Did anyone consider pure vs non-pure -- James _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
