Re: [GLISS] differentiating pre/post/neutral commands

[Xavier Scheuer]

On 11 September 2012 14:04, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Ok, and now for something completely different.  I think there has been
> one proposal to bring \[ \] in line with the post-event nature of [ ]
> and ( ), but the one thing I have been thinking about recently is
> whether we should not actually be going the other way round.
>
> (snip)
>
> One argument might be that
> c( c)
> might look ugly, but less ugly than
> (c )c
> looks.  Of course, neither is symmetric.  But if our logic is strained
> enough that people want to invent new constructs for preserving the
> current _order_ of writing while differentiating the logic, maybe it
> would make more sense to rethink the order.

Do I understand correctly that you suggest to change completely the
LilyPond language so that every command that is currently post-note
should be before the note?

Ugh, maybe that is more logical (for you) but the postfix syntax has
been used for many many years.  That sounds to me like people wanting
to change the electric current convention so that it is the same
direction as the electron flow.
http://xkcd.com/567/

Cheers,
Xavier

-- 
Xavier Scheuer <address@hidden>