"Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> writes:
> Nicolas Sceaux wrote Saturday, December 12, 2009 3:39 PM
>>
>
>> Le 12 déc. 2009 à 14:01, David Kastrup a écrit :
>>>
>>> { G4 g D // | /// // / // | \time 3/4 G g / | D // // | /// // // |
>>> }
>>
>> Memorizing more than one chord/note (e.g. 3 chords/notes), and
>> accessing
>> them using q, qq, qqq, would do it?
>
> Hhm. So when a single new chord is entered explicitly the chords
> held in qq and qqq all move down one? Not sure this is a good
> syntax.
One could use something akin to named editor registers. Those won't
shift.
<c e g>2-!1-. <c f a>4-.-!2 @11-> @2
being equivalent to
<c e g>2-. <c f a>4-. <c e g>1-> <c f a>4-.
Again, this syntax is not the prettiest.
> If in an existing score I later replace a q with an explicit chord all
> the following q, qq and qqq will need changing too.
Yes. But q, qq, and qqq are not intended for use all across the score,
but rather in confined places. I am not sure that this is all too bad
for writing. But I also am not sure that this is all too good for
reading.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
