On 21/09/15 4:44 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
It's really a case of diminuishing returns. The change for x:5 is definitely affecting the logic of LilyPond, but arguably that can of worms has been opened with x:13 already. x:5 is more important, but it's also a lot more likely to be used as basic building block, like in x:5.8. About x:5, I definitely feel ambiguous. In contrast, x:sus does not have all that much logic hinging on it: it's previous behavior is really "cute" in a programmer's sense of the word more than anything else. Other modifiers also introduce "personalized" behavior (cf c:dim7) and people are unlikely to have used it much, exactly because x:sus is musically not anything suggesting a powerchord. Maybe x:1.5 is tolerable enough. At any rate, the proposed x:5 is quite analogous to the existing x:13. Your proposals for c:4 and c:2 would require opening yet another scheme while the chords already have a musically sound name x:sus4 (now also x:sus) and x:sus2. So the threshold for x:2 and x:4 seems yet higher than that for x:5.
To be clear, I'm not proposing anything, simply pointing out that \chordmode produces some other less-than-obvious results that a "naive" user might stumble upon. How they should be handled, I'm not exactly sure. I'm tempted to suggest that they should return an error, and the user has to clearly specify whether they want an add4 or a sus4. But that's just a passing thought.
Brett _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
