Kieren MacMillan <kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> writes: > Hi, > >> Could it be an option to make <c e g>4*8 do the obvious thing? >> Or even { <c e g>4 }*8 ? >> That would be so much more natural. The first already does something, >> but not something which I would call useful. > > I use it all the time, actually. > >> The second bombs out. In contrast, q feels rather hackish. > > Since the patch (as I understand it) ensures that q does not duplicate > anything except the notes, q allows for > > <c e g>8-. q-^ q-. q-^ > > etc., right? Obviously, this would *not* be possible with something like > > <c e g>4*8
OTOH, something like { <c e g>8-. <c e g>-^ }*2 is not doable with the q approach. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel