Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 08:58:11AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: >> >> David Kastrup wrote Sunday, May 06, 2012 2:57 AM >> >> >In fact, isn't <> generally prettier than s1*0? Should we be using it >> >in code and documentation rather than s1*0? >> >> Definitely prettier, but maybe not so transparent as s1*0. > > +1 > > What about defining a > null > or > n > "note name"? Then we could write > c4 n\footnote
What's the duration of <c n> ? What is the duration of n4 ? Where is the point in a note name that does not take to the current duration? How is that making things simpler? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
