Re: Substitute for s1*0

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 10:17:05PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> 
> I've no objection to the docs being changed to use an empty chord
> but its semantics will need to be introduced somewhere.  The best place
> is probably the LM, in 2.2.4 Combining notes into chords.

I'm still not happy with an empty chord, especially in the
Learning Manual.  I think it leads to the "perlization" of
lilypond, where we end up looking like a ridiculous language like
Haskell.

I'm ok with using <> as a quick hack for things like convert-ly
rules, so I'm not arguing against David's patch.  But I wouldn't
want to see <> becoming part of our basic vocabulary.  I still
think that a "n" or "z" or "\null" would be more clear if there's
a solid reason to have such a "musical" "event" in a
non-computer-modified score.

- Graham