David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes:
> David Rogers <davidandrewrog...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> % It seems like Lilypond should be able to be smart enough to
>>> understand that something % like c1^"D.C. al Coda" is a written text
>>> instruction without needing \markup; % likewise \mark \markup seems
>>> inelegant and even redundant.
>>
>> In a way, I agree with you. But mainly I think this should be a
>> command instead of a markup - that a D.C. should be part of the logic
>> of Lilypond's repeat system and that the user should be supplying the
>> musical plan rather than the string of text to print.
>
> Are we talking about the same LilyPond?
>
> \relative c' { \mark "X" c1^"D.C. al Coda" }
>
> compiles quite fine for me.
Sorry: the above is not really a comment on your "D.C. should be part of
the logic" (which I actually agree with), but about the original
"LilyPond should be smart enough" statement.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
