Re: music function semantics

[Jan Warchoł]

David,

2011/7/27 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Neil Puttock <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> On 26 July 2011 22:41, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> So the question basically is: which of those mechanisms is actually
>>> being in use?  Are there examples for existing music functions
>>> interpreting a postevent or a chord constituent?
>>
>> \tweak would be the most common usage for both of these cases:
>>
>> c1-\tweak #'color #red -\fermata
>>
>> and
>>
>> < \tweak #'color #red c>1
>
> So much for my "nobody needs that" theory.  The problem I have is that
> accepting \transpose in all the same places as \tweak does not seem like
> a good idea.
>
> On the other hand, whether an error gets thrown by the parser or by the
> expression builder might not make that much of a difference to the end
> user than it feels like making to me.

if i understood you correctly (it's about the difference in syntax
between tweak and override?), i agree that it's quite a serious
problem.
...ah, so it is possible to modify ties in a chord separately!  Do you
realize that i didn't know about it?  I'd say that this means the
current state of things is too complicated.
I vote for changing the way things work completely (GLISS time
approaches, after all :P).
sorry if this is not very helpful... maybe i'll have specific ideas later.

cheers,
Janek