lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Renaming \setTextCresc, \setHairpinCresc, etc.


From: Trevor Daniels
Subject: Re: Renaming \setTextCresc, \setHairpinCresc, etc.
Date: Fri, 30 May 2008 20:27:53 +0100


----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick McCarty" <address@hidden>
To: "Valentin Villenave" <address@hidden>
Cc: <address@hidden>
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 7:47 PM
Subject: Re: Renaming \setTextCresc, \setHairpinCresc, etc.


On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 6:12 AM, Valentin Villenave
<address@hidden> wrote:
2008/4/30 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 22:43:59 -0700
Patrick McCarty <address@hidden> wrote:

I would like to propose that we rename the textual crescendo and
decrescendo commands to names that are more intuitive and are more
internally consistent.  The current implementation uses the "hairpin"
commands to revert the "text" commands, but I do not think this
solution is very intuitive.  Here is the list of the commands in
question:

\setTextCresc
\setTextDecresc
\setTextDecr
\setTextDim
\setHairpinCresc
\setHairpinDecresc
\setHairpinDim

\set**** must die.  It's massively confusing for newbies (and in
more than one case, doc writers).  I thought we'd fixed all of
these, but upon investigation it seems that we only did
ly/property-init.ly and not ly/spanners-init.ly


Since hairpins are the default output -- using \< and \> -- shouldn't
the revert commands indicate that the "textual" (de)crescendo marks
are being turned off?  Maybe we should keep the \set... commands that
set the alternative behavior (textual crescendos, etc.) and use
\unset...  commands as their opposites.  Or we could rename them using
the on/off method: \textCrescOn, \textCrescOff, etc.

I prefer on/off.  However, I'm not certain whether we want to go
with
 \textCrescOn
or
 \hairpinCrescOn
(with Off being the opposite, of course)

We could even go with pairs of:
 \crescText
 \crescHairpin

... actually, I think the last idea is by far the best.  Any
objections?

Since the Issue 143 has been fixed, we are now ready to rename this
command to... whatever you guys will decide.

I still think we should go with the On, Off commands.

I think the Hairpin commands that relate to "decrescendos" (currently,
\setHairpinDecresc and \setHairpinDim) are redundant because they
perform the same function.  That is, they revert to a mode that
produces the _same_ type of hairpin: the hairpin produced with \>.

IMO, if we go with the On and Off commands, it is clear that the
_text_ dynamic commands (set with ***On) are being reverted with
***Off.  And it clears up the redundancy issue I mentioned above:
there are only two types of hairpins, but there are currently 4
Hairpin commands dedicated to reverting to hairpin mode.

Here are the On and Off command pairs that I like:

\crescTextOn, \crescTextOff
\decrescTextOn, \decrescTextOff
\dimTextOn, \dimTextOff
\decrTextOn, \decrTextOff

I think is this too complicated.  For crescendos there are just
two possibilities - cresc. or hairpins - and for decrescendos
there are four - decresc., decr., dim or hairpin.  That is, six
altogether, so why do we need eight commands?

Based on Graham's proposal I would suggest the following
as logical and clear:

\crescAsCresc
\crescAsHairpin

and
\dimAsDecresc
\dimAsDecr
\dimAsDim
\dimAsHairpin
If there is an objection to "Hairpin" perhaps "Graphic" would
do?

Trevor





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]