Peter Bjuhr <peterbj...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 2014-05-20 12:23, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>> We probably should let \note accept a duration, but it's not actually
>>>> >>hard to pick apart and use \note-by-number on the parts.
>>> >
>>> Maybe you misunderstood me!? I meant that the
>>> >functionality was intended for a larger script...
>> So?
>
> Maybe it was me that misunderstood you instead! Did you mean to use
> \note like in your previous example:
>
> \markup { \note { 4. } }
>
> ?
>
> But why should \note-by-number be used for the parts, I didn't follow that?
You want to enter a duration in a simple manner and use it in several
contexts. One as markup, one as a duration or length.
The suggestion was to let LilyPond see it not as a string but as a
duration and go from there instead of writing your own duration parser.
I don't understand the problem you have with that.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
