Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes:
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 02:20:43AM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> To me, a Grand Input Syntax "fixing" of LilyPond, would amount to
>> creating a syntax that strictly separates parsing and interpretation.
>> This implies not only rethinking a lot of syntax, but also it means
>> letting go of some of the flexibility and conciseness of the current
>> format.
>
> Ok, consider one single "fix". Change:
> { \[ c'2 d' \] }
> into:
> { c'2 \[ d' \] }
>
> The old "enclosing" method of spanners (i.e. beams and slurs in
> lilypond 1.x) is almost completely deprecated now. Why not take
> the next step and fix ligatures as well? That would make the
> syntax more consistent.
Sounds good to me. The disconcerting thing is that I don't see a good
convert-ly rule on the horizon: we should have done this long ago,
together with the rest. Let me take a look at the parser...
Looks like it would be simple to do, and likely one should also include
\~ (PesOrFlexaEvent).
I don't know the respective input modes and terminology: will there
always be a note to attach all those to?
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
