Re: Issue 2070 in lilypond: Patch: Don't wrap EventChord around rhythmic events by default.

[lilypond]

Comment #15 on issue 2070 by address@hidden: Patch: Don't wrap EventChord  
around rhythmic events by default.
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2070

Well, for things like fingerings, I don't think the difference can easily  
go away: inside of a chord, fingerings will need to get attached to  
individual noteheads.

And since music functions don't get to know whether a simple event they are  
fiddling with will end up in an EventChord or not, they can't make that  
distinction either when working with something like c'-. or so.

I'll probably see whether I can manage to treat articulations on EventChord  
members differently from articulations without wrapping.  In that case, the  
visible behavior of <c>-? and c-? should become indistinguishable but  
different from <c-?>.  At the current point of time, c-? is equal to <c-?>  
which means that string numbers _do_ appear for c\4.  If I do this change,  
they will disappear again.

I have my doubts that behavior is useful.  For some articulations, is seems  
useful that inside of a chord they should get better associated with the  
notehead than they would be in the single-note case.  This _does_ include  
string numbers.  But not printing string numbers on single notes at all  
seems more like a bug than anything else, and code actually relying on that  
behavior is not on the list of compatibilities I can muster significant  
amounts of sympathy for.

So while there is a case for articulations being able to differentiate  
between the in-chord and the for-chord case (and it seems reasonable to map  
c-? to that), in general we have too many differences, and not printing  
anything at all in one of the cases does not seem like a good interface.