[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > For structural point of view, this change is toward right direction. > > > * Chords are more often used than simultaneous music. Hence, using < > > > for chords saves keystrokes. However, the benefit is not large, > > since << and >> are rather easy to type. > > I think the number of `<' or '>' marks should rather refer to the size > of the structural element: (1) chords, (2) simultaneous, (3) etc.?
The size of the structural element may have a nice theoretical ring to it, but I want to know about usability. > > * How does readability change? I have the impression that the old > > syntax is more readable than the new one, i.e. that > > > > Since readability is more important than efficient typing, my own > > feeling is that this change might not be a good idea. > > Readability can be increased by syntax coloring. Does it? The < > are already colored, but I don't think they stand out very much. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ Lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
