Brazen feature request

[David Rogers]

Hi all

I don't have any money to contribute, nor any coding capability, so
this is not a serious request in anything but tone of voice. :(

It's extremely likely that this request is an obvious one, and that it's
been requested in exactly this way many times, and has never been done
because of implementation difficulties. When I look in the mail
archive, I see several discussions of the cosmetics of what I'm asking
about, but not about the function. Maybe I haven't read the archive
closely enough.


The request is for six commands (NOT markups, but actual music commands
that affect the MIDI output and so on):

\segno
\fine
\tocoda
\coda
\dacapo
\dalsegno


It appears to me that the effect of a \dacapo or a \dalsegno would be
like retroactively (re?)-applying the existing Lilypond command \repeat
volta 2 to an earlier part of the music; the precise extent of that
earlier part being delineated by the \segno (if present) and the \fine.

I think the \tocoda command would have to be ignored one or more times
until we were passing that point in the piece for the last time, and
would then have to cause the parser to switch "streams" of music to the
\coda. I don't know if existing \repeat functionality would be helpful.

As a (mere) side-effect, each of these commands would cause a markup to
appear in the score.


Maybe the fact that some scores have these features in more than one
place, or in different and/or incompatible ways, makes the parser (or
the brain) explode.

I guess if this request is a bad idea, then it's good to find out that
fact.

-- 
David R