"Dmytro O. Redchuk" <brownian....@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun 28 Aug 2011, 11:21 Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> 2011/8/26 Dmytro O. Redchuk <brownian....@gmail.com>:
>> > On Fri 26 Aug 2011, 13:54 David Kastrup wrote:
>> >> So maybe the "spacer rest" terminology is not doing anybody a favor.
>> >>
>> >> Would you have felt more comfortable if my example had used "\skip"
>> >> instead of "spacer rests"?
>> > No, not sure. Why "music" should contain any "skips" to be "typeset"
>> > nicely?
>> >
>> > Well, really, excuse me :-)
>> >
>> > I wanted to say, that, very probably, "\<{...}" would be really great
>> > (to shift starting point right). And that spacers are, as for me, a bit
>> > "innatural".
>>
>> How do you like syntax like this:
>> e1 \< #0.25 \f #0.5 \> f2 \! #0.5
>> which would mean this
>> \new Voice << { e1 f2 } {s4 s4 \< s2 \f \> s4 s4 \! } >>
>> ?
> I would say, that for a new person who knows nothing about the syntax,
> the former variant offers much less "conventions" to learn then the
> latter.
The latter is not about learning conventions but a system. You can
reuse the components elsewhere basically immediately without looking
anything up.
Spoken differently: for a new person who knows nothing about the syntax,
knowing nothing about the syntax is not a desirable state to remain in.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
