Hello Folks, I'm rather new to Lily, and I don't have any cons/pro arguments about this change.
After reading the various reactions, a question : why not augment the language with a new keyword? Could be \relativeanchored or something, and would avoid the need for doc, snippets and existing user files changes. Sorry if I missed some fundamental point behind the design of Lily... Le 7 mars 2013 à 20:06, David Kastrup <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Please take a look at > > Issue 3229: Patch: Make \relative { ... } interpret the first pitch as > an absolute one > > <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3229> > > It's clear that this change will require quite a bit more work if it > gets accepted, and it is important that we get user feedback before > investing significant more work here. > > The idea is that \relative { ... } (namely \relative used without an > explicit reference pitch) uses the first note inside as the reference > pitch. That is, if the first note happens to be written as fis'' it > will sound as fis'' (absolute pitch). Using \relative without a > reference pitch has previously been discouraged. Its traditional > meaning is to have c' used as default reference pitch, leading to the > result > > \relative { f' } -> f' > \relative { g' } -> g > > which is not necessarily helpful. One rationale is to stop the > "distribution" of the information for the first pitch to potentially > quite separate places, like being able to write > > \new Staff \relative { > \key aes \major > << % Voice one > { c''2 aes4. bes8 } > ... > > instead of the previous > > \new Staff \relative c'' { > \key aes \major > << % Voice one > { c2 aes4. bes8 } > ... > > > Now the old behavior and recommended usage is _really_ old. Few people > use \relative without a reference pitch nowadays, so the amount of code > in need of changing is rather small. However, changing the > _recommended_ way of doing things requires a lot of changes in LilyPond > documentation (many of which can be done automatically as the current > patch shows, but of course quite a few also requiring more manual work), > and it will become visible quite thoroughly. > > So the question is how LilyPond users feel about this, both seasoned > users as well as newer ones: would this change make learning LilyPond > easier? Would it feel more convenient/logical in the long run? > > The actual change in semantics are just a few lines in > ly/music-functions-init.ly. But doing just that change alone would be > pointless if it's not enough of an improvement to actually change the > documentation extensively and recommend this use. > > How do people feel about this? > > -- > David Kastrup > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user -- Jacques Menu Ch. de la Pierre 12 1023 Crissier mailto:[email protected] _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
