On Tuesday, March 25, 2014 12:03:24 PM UTC+5:30, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Rustom Mody wrote: > > Something that Chris may relate to: > > You type a music score into lilypond > > Then call lilypond to convert it into standard western staff notation > > Why not put up the lilypond (ASCII) directly on the piano/organ when you > > play? > > This is far from rhetorical... ABC,Guido,etc (not python's!) have some > > claim to be *musically* (not just textually) readable and easier to > > master than standard staff notation > > Still for someone > > - used to staff notation > > - under the standard presumptions of western music: > > -- harmony > > -- spelling c# ≠ d♭ > > -- a note is a note ie C to D is as much a note as D to E > > staff notation is hard to beat
> I wouldn't say it's hard to beat... I happily beat time while looking > at staff notation! > (Of course, I shouldn't beat time. He doesn't like that.) > Staff notation isn't perfect by any means (and there've been various > projects to improve on it), but it's a lot better than the "source > code" form in Lilypond. This is partly because my source code tends to > look at multiple (often four) separate lines of harmony, often plus a > separate line of chords, but when I'm playing, I want to be able to > eyeball all of it at once. ALl of which is isomorphic to Steven's point that forty is less eyeballable than 40 And mine that ∅ is more eyeballable than set([]) -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
