How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter?
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Kieren MacMillan < kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> wrote: > Hi Werner, > > > I suggest that such a command allows for a third, optional parameter, > > which makes \addAt relative to the `rehearsalMark' property. > > If you’re talking about \mark \default, then I could see the benefit of > that. The problem is, most of us overload \mark for a bunch of non \default > stuff (e.g., ‘eyeglasses’, text instructions, etc.), because there’s no > other mechanism available. And I doubt it would be easy to implement your > suggestion “filtered” to only the \default marks. > > But I’m always happy to be proven wrong! > > Cheers, > Kieren. > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
