Re: \relative proposal: putting absolute pitches anywhere within \relative block using @-sign

[David Kastrup]

Olivier Biot <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 8:24 PM, <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>     Examples:
>     
>     1. { c4 c' c@'' c@, }
>     
>     These are interpreted as absolute pitches, so the @-signs are
>     redundant here.
>     They could be silently ignored, or the at signs could be an error
>     outside of \relative blocks.
>     
>     What do people think?
>
> Hmmm... I'd use the @ sign as a prefix, not as a suffix, as in: 
>
> { c4 c' @c'' @c, }
>
> However, more fundamentally, I think the entire discussion relates to
> the intent of \relative and the current use seen by the LiliPond
> community.
>
> I'd rather see \relative { @c4 c' c'' c, } than \relative { c4 c' c''
> c, } in cases when the first pitch is supposed / expected to be an
> absolute pitch.

What else is it supposed to be?

> However there is no fundamental need for the first pitch being an
> absolute pitch in the first place.

It can be relative to f if we want to.  That adds the least amount of
information to the first pitch.

> Maybe we must work on the intent of \relative first.

I have a hard time imagining what that is supposed to mean if we assume
that we haven't been doing it so far.

-- 
David Kastrup