Hello, )-----Original Message----- )From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore....@gnu.org )[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore....@gnu.org] On )Behalf Of Jan Warchol )Sent: 29 July 2011 08:11 )To: David Kastrup )Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org )Subject: Re: music function semantics ) )David, ) )2011/7/27 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: )> Neil Puttock <n.putt...@gmail.com> writes: )> )>> On 26 July 2011 22:41, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: )>> )>>> So the question basically is: which of those mechanisms is actually )>>> being in use? Are there examples for existing music functions )>>> interpreting a postevent or a chord constituent? )>> )>> \tweak would be the most common usage for both of these cases: )>> )>> c1-\tweak #'color #red -\fermata )>> )>> and )>> )>> < \tweak #'color #red c>1 )> )> So much for my "nobody needs that" theory. The problem I have is that )> accepting \transpose in all the same places as \tweak does not seem )> like a good idea. )> )> On the other hand, whether an error gets thrown by the parser or by )> the expression builder might not make that much of a difference to the )> end user than it feels like making to me. ) )if i understood you correctly (it's about the difference in syntax between )tweak and override?), i agree that it's quite a serious problem. )...ah, so it is possible to modify ties in a chord separately! Do you realize )that i didn't know about it?
Snippet for LSR? James _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
