On 27 February 2017 at 22:57, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 4:26 PM, tisimst <tisimst.lilyp...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 8:10 AM, David Kastrup [via Lilypond] < > >> ml-node+s1069038n20054...@n5.nabble.com> wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> I suddenly remembered that I should have entered some Dowland > previously > >>> and dug around on my disk, finding this: > [snip] > >> > >> I like the clarity of LP's input syntax verbosity, but am I ever glad > I'm > >> not forced to be _that_ verbose! > > > > If you think that is bad, you should take a look at the original > MusiXTeX input. > > Well, the respective output file (after stripping off mpp.tex which > apparently is included every time) gives a good idea of how this would > have looked in MusiXTeX: > [snip verbosity] >
Ah yes, MusixTeX. Those were the days. I used to do my bagpipe music in MusixTex and before that, in MusicTeX. I must say that I greatly prefer Lilypond though. Because of the fiddly syntax, I used to define a macro for each bar so they could be easily reused (bagpipe music tend to be quite repetitive). That is fortunately not necessary any more. -- Sven Axelsson ++++++++++[>++++++++++>+++++++++++>++++++++++>++++++ >++++<<<<<-]>++++.+.++++.>+++++.>+.<<-.>>+.>++++.<<. +++.>-.<<++.>>----.<++.>>>++++++.<<<<.>>++++.<----.
Corriechoillies.tex
Description: TeX document
corriechoillie.ly
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
