chapter. Example templates isn't the place to demonstrate such things.
No, the reason is that I have a pathological dislike of having anything in the individual instrument files that doesn't need to be there. Sure, I could do:
% Full score: << \new Staff { << \global \Violinone >> } \new Staff { << \global \Violintwo>> } \new Staff { << \global \Viola>> } \new Staff { << \global \Cello>> } >> % First violin part: \new Staff { << \global \Violinone >> }
But that's longer than % full score \new StaffGroup \keepWithTag #'score \music %first violin part \keepWithTag #'vn1 \music
Now, is there any reasonable advantage? I'm not certain if there are (although I don't think that having this example in the templates section hurts anybody).
I still like the idea, though. It provides a standard way of
creating individual instrument files -- or combinations
of instruments. Once you've created the main file
("piece.ly" in the template), you don't need to fool around
with creating the infrastructure for each individual instrument.
I still make mistakes when I'm doing the whole
\score{ \new StaffGroup << \new Staff {} \newStaff {} >> }
thing. It's easier for me to get that stuff done once.Is it useful for LilyPond experts? No, probably not. But I imagine that quite a few non-experts could really appreciate creating input files this way.
- Graham
On 7-Jan-05, at 2:03 AM, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
Now I realize that you did this to get an example of how to use \tag. Still, the problem is that it doesn't really show any advantage (as far as I can see). Can't we find a better example where the command gives a clearer advantage?
/Mats
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
