Hi Abraham,
Am 14.01.2015 um 17:24 schrieb tisimst:
> P.S. I'm with Alistair, though. Is there any reason \arpeggioArrow[Up/Down]
> isn't designed to work by itself rather than requiring another explicit
> \arpeggio?
I think, it is simply implemented in analogy to all the other Up/Down/Neutral
settings: { \slurUp a( a) \slurNeutral a( a) } etc.
In that sense it is very consistent: You set the direction before you use it and
it is valid until you reset the direction to netural again. It is just a
shortcut for overrides as the other direction settings are.
However, I feel like the arpeggio is a bit odd in this list:
arpeggio, slurs, phrasing slurs, stems, tuplet brackets, augmentation dots etc.
first because it is more often than not a one-time thing and second because it
is written in a long form anyway: '\arpeggio' and not like slurs '(' or
implicitly by the duration '4.'. So writing '\arpeggioUp' would not hurt. And,
in contrast to slur for example, the direction markers ^ and _ do not work to
set the direction of the arpeggio arrow.
So I understand why it works the way it is – and it has some logic – but at the
same time I understand you, that there would be more straight forward (more easy
to understand) solutions. It is perhaps a case where consistency is not the
primary goal.
Cheers,
Joram
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
