Joshua Haberman wrote: >> As for the "lilypond >> developers" opinion: I've personally spent a lot of time writing >> convertors (etf2ly, pmx2ly, musedata2ly, etc.) only to find out that >> noone uses them. > > Would you use a compiler that required you to first run your source file > through an external program that translates your program into a > different language with vastly different semantics? Would you feel that > you can count on every construct in the target language being translated > correctly?
IIRC gcc "translates" the source code at least three times before converting it to machine code. Personally, I don't have any problems with that. As Han-Wen pointed out, support might be good or bad for an external converter as well as for native integration. As long as mudela mainly superseeds MusicXML, an external program is fine IMO. If musicxml2ly is finished, it would be nice to have it distributed with lilypond, of course. However, I expect this to happen if support for musicxml2ly is guaranteed by someone. Just my $0.02 Thomas _______________________________________________ Lilypond-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
