numbers
This works:
```
{ \ottava -1 c }
```
while this fails:
```
{ \ottava +1 c'' }
```
Is there a technical reason for it?
Werner
Re: numbers
Werner LEMBERG writes:
> This works:
>
> ```
> { \ottava -1 c }
> ```
>
> while this fails:
>
> ```
> { \ottava +1 c'' }
> ```
>
> Is there a technical reason for it?
As far as LilyPond is concerned, `+` is not a part of numbers. Is there
a compelling argument for wasting syntactic elements on doing nothing?
--
David Kastrup
Re: numbers
>> This works:
>>
>> ```
>> { \ottava -1 c }
>> ```
>>
>> while this fails:
>>
>> ```
>> { \ottava +1 c'' }
>> ```
>>
>> Is there a technical reason for it?
>
> As far as LilyPond is concerned, `+` is not a part of numbers. Is
> there a compelling argument for wasting syntactic elements on doing
> nothing?
I think that 'wasting' is too harsh a statement. In comparison to
other syntactical elements (together with the interpretation of Scheme
code), a change to support `+` has no significant impact, AFAICS.
Can you imagine any other use for `+` right before numbers? Otherwise
I suggest to make it work, to provide the least surprise for users.
Werner
Re: numbers
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>>> This works:
>>>
>>> ```
>>> { \ottava -1 c }
>>> ```
>>>
>>> while this fails:
>>>
>>> ```
>>> { \ottava +1 c'' }
>>> ```
>>>
>>> Is there a technical reason for it?
>>
>> As far as LilyPond is concerned, `+` is not a part of numbers. Is
>> there a compelling argument for wasting syntactic elements on doing
>> nothing?
>
> I think that 'wasting' is too harsh a statement. In comparison to
> other syntactical elements (together with the interpretation of Scheme
> code), a change to support `+` has no significant impact, AFAICS.
It makes + inelegible for other purposes. + as a sign does nothing, so
the language does not gain anything at all.
You could potentially require its use for disambiguating durations from
numbers, but I don't think requiring people to type + all the time is
going to be a crowd pleaser.
`-` is used within chords. So is `+`. `-` is specially lexed in chords
because of syntactic conflicts. That comes with its own bunch of
problems. `+` isn't. Yet.
`-` can become a part of numerical tokens in certain syntax modes, so it
isn't just the parser that is involved here but also the lexer.
> Can you imagine any other use for `+` right before numbers? Otherwise
> I suggest to make it work, to provide the least surprise for users.
Do we say anywhere that `+` is a sign in LilyPond syntax? Where does
the surprise come from?
--
David Kastrup
Re: numbers
>> Can you imagine any other use for `+` right before numbers? >> Otherwise I suggest to make it work, to provide the least surprise >> for users. > > Do we say anywhere that `+` is a sign in LilyPond syntax? Where > does the surprise come from? Well, both `#+3` and `#-3` work, so it might be tempting to assume that `+3` and `-3` also work (outside of `\markup`). Werner
Re: numbers
Werner LEMBERG writes: >>> Can you imagine any other use for `+` right before numbers? >>> Otherwise I suggest to make it work, to provide the least surprise >>> for users. >> >> Do we say anywhere that `+` is a sign in LilyPond syntax? Where >> does the surprise come from? > > Well, both `#+3` and `#-3` work, so it might be tempting to assume > that `+3` and `-3` also work (outside of `\markup`). So does ##e+3.0 and so does #3/1 so should we be supporting those as well? -- David Kastrup
PATCHES - Countdown to December 29
Here is the current countdown report. The next countdown will begin on 2023-12-29 A list of all merge requests can be found here: https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests?sort=label_priority Push: !2206 Fix horizontal position of volta brackets not starting at a bar line - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2206 !2203 Improve documentation of `script-priority` property - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2203 Countdown: !2208 Let Ferneyhough hairpins support al niente circles - Thomas Morley https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2208 !2207 print-gittxt.sh: Produce narrower output - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2207 Review: !2210 documentation of `details` subproperties - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2210 !2209 Improve documentation of `break-align-orders` - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2209 New: !2211 Match thickness of slurs and ties - Werner Lemberg https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/2211 Waiting: No patches in Waiting at this time. Cheers, Colin
Re: numbers
>> Well, both `#+3` and `#-3` work, so it might be tempting to assume >> that `+3` and `-3` also work (outside of `\markup`). > > So does ##e+3.0 and so does #3/1 so should we be supporting those as > well? The former? Rather not. The latter, maybe. I can imagine that people would like to say ``` \magnifyStaff 2/3 ``` However, given that this representation no longer looks like a 'normal number' for most people, I think it is fully sufficient to use the already working ``` \magnifyStaff #2/3 ``` instead. Werner
Re: numbers
On 2023-12-27 10:51 pm, Werner LEMBERG wrote: Well, both `#+3` and `#-3` work, so it might be tempting to assume that `+3` and `-3` also work (outside of `\markup`). So does ##e+3.0 and so does #3/1 so should we be supporting those as well? The former? Rather not. The latter, maybe. I can imagine that people would like to say ``` \magnifyStaff 2/3 ``` However, given that this representation no longer looks like a 'normal number' for most people, I think it is fully sufficient to use the already working ``` \magnifyStaff #2/3 ``` instead. Would it make sense for `\magnifyStaff` to accept `scale?` as its parameter? I think that would permit `2/3` due to the `fraction?` predicate. -- Aaron Hill
