Tim McNamara wrote:
> I think that this could simplify the syntax by creating a standard skeleton
> for .ly files going from most global to most specific:
>
> \version information
>
> \paper information
>
> \form information (number of bars, repeat locations, bars-per-line, rehearsal
> mark locations, number of staves, instruments/voices, \clef, \key, \time,
> etc.)
>
> \music information (could be \notes (including percussion), \chordnames or
> \lyrics)
As a programmer first and musician second, I have a deep appreciation
("awe" is more like it) for how LilyPond got to where it is. Computers
deal with very strict rules. Humans, when writing out music, apply
rules very loosely. We stretch things, we abbreviate, we shift things
around for dubious reasons, we make up new symbols, we assign new
meaning to old symbols, we apply titling rules that make sense to us at
the time. And yet, everyone wants LilyPond to engrave exactly what they
were writing out by hand. In virtually every case, LilyPond can do
that, but that immense flexibility means complexity.
If we were willing to have LilyPond become the music police, so that it
engraved a specific, approved subset of the myriad rules that have been
applied to engraving over time, it would certainly be possible to
simplify the syntax considerably. Would that make users happy? I don't
think it would.
And so, you have to be able to support numbering every measure on top,
numbering every measure below, numbering every 5th measure, numbering
every 8th measure, numbering only at the start of each system, numbering
every staff, numbering some staves, boxing the numbers, circling the
numbers, italicizing the numbers, skipping the number when there is a
rehearsal mark, or not, etc. Every individual will say "well, of course
it needs to support X!", but everyone's X will be different.
The same applies to layout. Each movement on a separate page? Multiple
movements on a page? New movements indented, or not? Different titles
on each movement? Different titles on each page? Suppress some titles
on certain pages? One huge long system like a piano roll? Again,
LilyPond can do ALL of that. It's not entirely clear you could retain
that flexibility and still simplify the syntax significantly.
That's the problem. Any new scheme must embrace what has already been
done. That virtually guarantees there are going to be multiple ways to
specify things.
--
Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
