Francisco Vila <[email protected]> writes:
> 2012/9/4 Trevor Daniels <[email protected]>:
>> So what problems do the users have, exactly? We should address this
>> question first. Janek apparently has his list, which would be a good start.
>> But we should not invent problems where they don't exist. I've probably
>> read every email on the user list for the last 4 years, and
>> inconsistent parser
>> rules have not figured prominently. Another example is the considerable
>> discussion so far about pre- and post-fix notation. Again, has this been a
>> problem prominent on the user list? I don't think so. So why try
>> to solve it?
>> Especially in ways that would screw all existing code. In fact, I
>> don't think
>> /users/ have any serious problems with the syntax as it currently exists,
>> other than getting to grips with it initially.
>
> Very true, in my opinion.
>
> For newcomers, the whole paradigm is a challenge. However, once they
> have the basics, musicians can learn the rules.
>
> \offtopic {
> New Spanish users find it difficult to get used to very common
> keystrokes which are only under AltGr in Spanish keyboards. So, lesson
> zero for the language from a practical POV is:
>
> {{{{
> }}}}
> \\\\
> {}{}{}{}
> \{} \{} \{}
>
> Now you are prepared to write \relative f { c }.
>
> What I once found embarrassing was to try \key d (and no \major or
> \minor afterwards) and fail to compile because, in my mind, "in D"
> means \key d \major with \major by default. Then I learned that \key
> has two non-optional arguments
It has two optional ones. Being in end position, they can only be
skipped by an explicit \default. If I remember correctly, skipping just
one caused an error message, so \key \default works, but \key c\default
doesn't.
> and now I think optional arguments are problematic.
>
> Regarding \relative optional_pitch {}, I think the optional pitch is
> very problematic and now it's time to mandate a pitch argument, forbid
> the obsolete form "\relative {}" and convert-ly it into "\relative f
> {}".
That does not make sense. The obsolete form "\relative {}" is to be
converted to "\relative c' {}" if at all. I _wish_ it would have been
defined as "\relative f {}" since that is logically very much related to
leaving the pitch off altogether. But history has decided otherwise.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
