Am 15.06.2015 um 01:43 schrieb musicus:
Ok, this sounds indeed very interesting.
I understand your explenation regarding nesting of <<>> in following way:
<<
{"layerOne"}
\\
<<
{"layerOne"}
\\
{"layerTwo"}
>>
>>
which leads to the problem:
\version "2.19.17"
<<
{a' a' a' a'}
\\
{
b b
<<
{c c}
\\
{a, a,}
>>
}
>>
I don't think that "a" and "c" should share a stem. Is there any
reason to repeat the "layerOne" in nested "<<>>"?
Yes, explained in that very e-mail to which you responded here.
Following by default (without needing \new Voice) seems to be much
more understandable.
This is not a matter of changing Lilypond. It’s a matter of using it in
accordance with documentation. We can’t make sense of any kind of input
which any user might find more intuitive. In order for a syntax change
to be considered, the new syntax must offer new possibilities or be
considerably easier to type/understand or logically compelling than the
current way to do it. The current behaviour is carefully designed and we
said all about how to use it in order to get your desired result: use
only one layer of <<\\>> or explicitly instantiate voices (\new Voice
{}), which is anyway recommended for most situations.
Sometimes it’s hard to get a grip of Lilypond’s concepts, but you’ll get
there :-)
Regards, Simon
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
