Malte Meyn <lilyp...@maltemeyn.de> writes: > Am 23.03.2018 um 12:47 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Malte Meyn <lilyp...@maltemeyn.de> writes: >> >>> Hi list, >>> >>> is there a reason for the special order of \offset arguments? I would prefer >>> \offset Beam positions #'(2 . 3) >>> or—even better because there would be no confusion with \override— >>> \offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3) >>> instead of the current >>> \offset positions #'(2 . 3) Beam >> >> \offset can be applied to music expressions. And something like >> >> \offset \offset c' positions #'(2 . 3) Y-offset #'3 >> >> would be a lot less pleasant to read than >> >> \offset Y-offset #'3 \offset positions #'(2 . 3) c' >> >> For that reason, \tweak-like expressions generally take the music >> expression to be tweaked as their last argument. That makes nesting >> them reasonably clean. >> > > Thanks for explanation! After reading that and trying some more stuff > I learned that > \offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3) > works also but it’s a \tweak and > \offset positions #'(2 . 3) Beam > is an \override that can be prefixed with a \once. > > So > \offset Beam.positions #'(2 . 3) > and > \single \offset positions #'(2 . 3) Beam > should be the same?
Pretty much so I guess. Seems unneeded here, but for stuff like \omit, there is no substitute form for directed tweaks like \single \omit Flag since you don't specify a property name at all and thus have no place for a grob name without using \single . -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
