Re: [GLISS] why the hell all this fuss

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> wrote:
>> His very point is that deprecated syntax must either cause a warning
>> or an error *by running LilyPond itself*.  I fully second that, and it
>> would be a valuable task to check that for the transition from version
>> 2.14 to 2.16.
>
> +1

His complaint basically was that setting non-existent object properties
(as opposed to setting non-existent context properties) does not produce
an error or warning.

Fixing that will take a few more months for me.  It may be the case that
someone else finds a way to do this quicker in the existing framework
for properties; I just won't bother myself before rewriting the
framework.

> Hmm.  Maybe.
> It would be useful for other kinds of spanners, and also articulations
> (for example to place a turn during a note).
> Would creating macros for all of them be feasible? (maybe i miss
> something obvious?)

Creating a single macro that can be used on all of them.

> My rough idea would look something like this
> (this is just a musing, not a proposal for discussion yet):
>
> { b2 \<@0.5 a2 address@hidden } meaning { << b1 { s2 \< s2 \! } >> }

Looks like a case of the cure being worse than the problem.  Apart from
not being related in any obvious manner.

>>> I don't think we have a simple way of extending our syntax to
>>> express them - some basic design principles would have to be changed
>>> a bit, i suppose.  So let's change them now.
>>
>> As far as I can see, what you want is not syntax changes.  You simply
>> want new, additional commands.
>
> Not quite :)  \arpeggioUpWithHairpinDown and
> \arpeggioUpWithPianoFirstThenHairpinToPianissimo don't sound like fun!
> ;)

Commands can take arguments.

>> Or rather, an improved set of standard macros which come with LilyPond.
>
> That's more like it, but i'm not totally sure.
> What i think of is a general way of attaching objects to another
> objects.  For example '&' would attach objects:
> <c e g>\arpeggio&\<  meaning  a hairpin attached to arpeggio
> g\fermata&\markup \italic {10 seconds}  meaning  a "10 seconds" markup
> attached to the fermata.

You are thinking in ways of PDF.  LilyPond is meant for expressing
music.  If we build in syntax like that, it should carry musical
meaning, not just create pretty images.  How do you "attach" things like
that to MIDI or MusicXML?

-- 
David Kastrup