On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 03:44:27PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Reinhold Kainhofer <reinh...@kainhofer.com> writes: > > >>> { > >>> \at 4 \< > >>> \at 1*2/3 \! > >>> c'1\p > >>> } > >> [12 days later, and no followup again] > >> > >> Let's just continue pretending me to be a naysayer then. > > > > You demonstrated that a solution is possible, but quite inconsistent with > > the lilypond language: You have to write the dynamic BEFORE the note, > > although it should be printed AFTER the note... > > It is conceivable to cook up stuff that would allow to write something > like > > c'1\p-\at 4 \< -\at 1*2/3 \!
Really? Wow, I wish you had replied with this when I wrote " Now, if a music function can apply to the current note, i.e. c1-\at{ s4 s s\f s } then I'd be much happier." on 2012 Sep 13: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00597.html > If you don't even bother to reply, how am I supposed to guess what your > problem with my approach is? Evidently Reinhold isn't the only person who doesn't "even bother to reply". > In my opinion, dynamics are one case where using postfix syntax was a > mistake, exactly because they are not inherently associated with a > particular note but rather a moment of time. Are you speaking of the implementation or the music? I consider dynamics to be associated with moments of time within a voice. > It is _that_ choice which > does not really fit well with the general concepts of the LilyPond > language, and in consequence dynamics are the _dominant_ example for use > of <> and/or s1*0. So my preferred path to a remedy would rather be to > un-postevent stuff that does not really fit the postevent category > rather than to mess with the timing relations of postevents. Hmm. Something like this: \p \accent( c4 \legato fis8. \f )d16 ? (additional spaces added to demonstrate which commands go with which notes) - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel