On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 11:57 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
> David Winfrey <d...@patriot.net> writes: > > > Keith OHara <k-ohara5a5a <at> oco.net> writes: > >> > >> Phil Holmes <mail <at> philholmes.net> writes: > >> > > >> > But if you enter b4 in F major, you'll get a natural typeset, so there > >> can > >> > be no confusion. It seems like you're effectively proposing that b4 > is a > >> b > >> > natural I've entered accidentally, but bn4 is one I've entered > >> deliberately. > >> > How would Lily show the difference? > >> > > >> > >> As I understand David, Lily need not show any difference. > >> Accepting the explicit bn helps the user read his own input. > > > > This is what I meant; there would be no difference in the output. > > The Lilypond parser would simply ignore 'n' if it finds 'n' when > > it expects an accidental or note. > > As my musical education and practice is from a different note language, > I cannot really say much about the motivation of that approach. In my > country one would never call a "cis" just "c" when talking about music, > not even informally (but then nobody wants to get caught being informal > anyway). Is this really significantly different in English? > > In the US, I hear people calling "c-sharp" "c" often enough. This usage is certainly not good practice in music theory classes (where I correct it whenever I can). I can't say anything about informal usage. --David _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
