> Le 11 nov. 2022 à 15:02, Kieren MacMillan <kie...@kierenmacmillan.info> a
> écrit :
>
> Hi Jean (et al.),
>
>> Personally, I find it striking that the *only* two LilyPond
>> libraries I am hearing about regularly on mailing lists,
>> edition-engraver and arranger.ly, are both about
>> inserting / replacing music in a score at a certain
>> point in time, although with different purposes
>> (tweaking vs. arranging) and with different authors,
>> implementations and users.
>
> Also, to a great extent, \after, which has consumed a larger-than-usual
> amount of mailing list electrons of late… ;)
>
>> To me, that means it would be good to integrate generic tools
>> inspired by them into LilyPond proper.
>
> Yes. The main reason I don't compose “into Lilypond” is the irritation with
> implementing formal changes, which really comes down to the sequential nature
> of the note code — the ability to “natively” [and, dare we hope, really
> easily/simply?] insert/replace musical elements at “arbitrary” moments would
> be a game-changer.
Have you tried out arranger.ly?
>> Admittedly, this syntax has more potential benefit in
>> the future for these external tools or tools in LilyPond
>> inspired from them than it has benefit for current
>> standard use of LilyPond.
>
> I disagree: check the archives for all the talk about skips and global
> variables and the like, and you'll see that this is a fundamental pain point
> for just about every user who moves beyond the very simplest of scores.
Are you referring to one specific mailing list thread, or several of them?
Best,
Jean
