Re: Renaming \setTextCresc, \setHairpinCresc, etc.

[Patrick McCarty]

On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Valentin Villenave
<address@hidden> wrote:
> 2008/4/30 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:43:59 -0700
>> Patrick McCarty <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to propose that we rename the textual crescendo and
>>> decrescendo commands to names that are more intuitive and are more
>>> internally consistent.  The current implementation uses the "hairpin"
>>> commands to revert the "text" commands, but I do not think this
>>> solution is very intuitive.  Here is the list of the commands in
>>> question:
>>>
>>> \setTextCresc
>>> \setTextDecresc
>>> \setTextDecr
>>> \setTextDim
>>> \setHairpinCresc
>>> \setHairpinDecresc
>>> \setHairpinDim
>>
>> \set**** must die.  It's massively confusing for newbies (and in
>> more than one case, doc writers).  I thought we'd fixed all of
>> these, but upon investigation it seems that we only did
>> ly/property-init.ly and not ly/spanners-init.ly
>>
>>
>>> Since hairpins are the default output -- using \< and \> -- shouldn't
>>> the revert commands indicate that the "textual" (de)crescendo marks
>>> are being turned off?  Maybe we should keep the \set... commands that
>>> set the alternative behavior (textual crescendos, etc.) and use
>>> \unset...  commands as their opposites.  Or we could rename them using
>>> the on/off method: \textCrescOn, \textCrescOff, etc.
>>
>> I prefer on/off.  However, I'm not certain whether we want to go
>> with
>>  \textCrescOn
>> or
>>  \hairpinCrescOn
>> (with Off being the opposite, of course)
>>
>> We could even go with pairs of:
>>  \crescText
>>  \crescHairpin
>>
>> ... actually, I think the last idea is by far the best.  Any
>> objections?
>
> Since the Issue 143 has been fixed, we are now ready to rename this
> command to... whatever you guys will decide.

I still think we should go with the On, Off commands.

I think the Hairpin commands that relate to "decrescendos" (currently,
\setHairpinDecresc and \setHairpinDim) are redundant because they
perform the same function.  That is, they revert to a mode that
produces the _same_ type of hairpin: the hairpin produced with \>.

IMO, if we go with the On and Off commands, it is clear that the
_text_ dynamic commands (set with ***On) are being reverted with
***Off.  And it clears up the redundancy issue I mentioned above:
there are only two types of hairpins, but there are currently 4
Hairpin commands dedicated to reverting to hairpin mode.

Here are the On and Off command pairs that I like:

\crescTextOn, \crescTextOff
\decrescTextOn, \decrescTextOff
\dimTextOn, \dimTextOff
\decrTextOn, \decrTextOff

What are your opinions?

Thanks,
Patrick