Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[Trevor Daniels]

Graham Percival wrote Saturday, September 01, 2012 12:11 PM

> I agree; it's a mess.  Let's examine David's most hated example:
> 
> \version "2.15.0"
> {
>  \tempo 4 = 60
>  c1 c
>  \tempo 4. = 60 ~ 72
>  c1 c
>  \tempo "Andante"
>  c1 c
>  \tempo "Allegro" 4 = 120
>  c1 c
>  \tempo "Allegro" 4 = 120 ~ 144
>  c1 c
>  \tempo \markup{ Presto } 4. = 172 ~ 188
>  c1 c
> }

While this might be a mess for the parser to sort out it is perfectly
understandable for a musician trying to write his/her music.

In this discussion we must always consider what it is we are
trying to optimise: something easy for a parser or easy for a
musician?  I'm not saying this must be left unchanged, but if it
is replaced the replacement must be as acceptable to a musician,
otherwise we're going backwards.

Trevor