> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Kieren MacMillan <
address@hidden>
> To: David Nalesnik <
address@hidden>
> Cc: Lilypond-User Mailing List <
address@hidden>
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 10:22:15 -0400
> Subject: Re: Suggestion to make sharps and flats persistent
> Hi David,
>
> > But minor-mode music is often a conglomeration of the "forms" of the
> > minor scale which makes them of limited separate utility. Nothing is
> > in "harmonic minor." Notating something in minor by J. S. Bach could
> > be terrifying.
>
> Oh, I totally agree with "terrifying" (and, in my opinion, unhelpful). =)
> I’m just pointing out that it’s not difficult to figure out how to make it work for people who don’t mind living in terror.
>
But if we support terrifying modes, then we have to deal with all of the issues that come fom people having difficulty with terrifying modes.
I'm a firm believer in the simple statement that in LilyPond, you type the pitch you hear, and the software is responsible for getting the display correct (strictly speaking, this means that I should oppose relative mode, although I admit I'm inconsistent here).
Making up a syntax is easy.
Implementing the syntax is harder -- there are lots of corner cases.
Supporting difficult syntax is harder stil -- it'a an ongoing expense. That's why I'm so appreciative of David K's work to simplify and rationalize our syntax so it (almost) always works the way one thinks it should.
A user could certainly write a music function that would allow the entry of "what you see" instead of "what you hear". And if they did so, it could be added to the LSR.
But I would be against adding this to the official LilyPond distribution.
Thansk,
Carl