On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 6:30 AM David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > Check out > < > https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/137874/lilypond-how-to-modify-stencil-by-automatically-getting-the-current-stencil-and > > > and its (currently) two answers while the second one (which was posted > first) has not been removed. > > <SNIP>
> Why hasn't a capable LilyPond programmer not been able to come up with a > much simpler and much more versatile solution as shown in the first > answer? > > I think that there is a huge startup curve to become a LilyPond programmer, and once you've paid the price to get into the programming, you have a set of tools that you know how to use. So you continue to use them, even when better tools become available. > LilyPond has received a lot of work to facilitate simple solutions, and > yet the better approachability tends to rather lend itself to people > becoming more confident designing overcomplicated solutions. > > I think that the work that facilitates simple solutions is not readily apparent in the Notation Reference, perhaps because we don't have a nice place to put it there. > What kind of project should we tackle in order to help people better use > what is there in a manner that is reasonably easy to use and understand? > I think this is a great question. I wish I had a great answer to this great question, but I don't think I do. I think it's related to the problem of not having good documentation of LilyPond processing. If I had a good understanding of LilyPond processing, then perhaps I could see where the difficulties arise in more complex modifications of the music. Then, the simplifications provided could be introduced. I don't know this information well enough to write the documentation. I'm not sure I even know it well enough to ask the questions to help the documentation. Perhaps we could get started by looking at the question you posted (about bracketifying a rest, when the rest is not the LilyPond default rest). A clear explanation about why the basic method didn't work and how the "best" Lilypond tools could be used to overcome it might help us understand the issues. > > How can we better spread best programming practises and showcase the > tools that are available for them? > Which people know the best programming practices? You, Harm, Werner? I'm certainly not part of that group. Thanks, Carl
