Re: [PATCH] Re: syntax change for \cresc

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

Am Sonntag, 25. April 2010 14:10:40 schrieben Sie:
> [Dreams\] It would be great to have a simpler, more user-friendly way
> to align text with dynamics.  [\Dreams]

Absolutely. You can't imagine how long i fought to find proper ways to align 
"pp" and "pp sempre" properly with each other!

> > You know that you can (globally or locally) override the spanner type
> > and even hide the line?
> >    \override DynamicTextSpanner #'dash-period = #-1.0
> 
> Yes, I know.
> But the problem is: what if I have a score with both "spanned" and
> "non-spanned" textual crescendi?
[...]
> And this still requires the \crescTextCresc, *each time* you switch from
> "hairpin" to "text".

No, \< will produce a hairpin, \cresc a text crescendo... There's really no 
need for \crescTextCresc any more.

> And also a simple, user-friendly syntax for custom crescendo texts
> (your music function is great but is Scheme-based and I was thinking at
> a "LiliPond"-based syntax).

Every such syntax will need to be defined in and based on Scheme! The 
regression test I pointed out just provides the function definition. Lilypond 
does not provide it itself (yet?), so you need to copy the definition somewhere 
in your own include files. 
But when using it, there is no explicit scheme code involved, just "normal" 
LilyPond syntax, e.g. 
    c-\myTextCresc "crescendo..."

> > See input/regression/dynamics-custom-text-spanner-postfix.ly for how
> > to create dynamic text spanners with arbitrary texts.
> 
> Is it possible to have the same without the extension line to be
> printed?

As with any other text crescendo spanner:
   \override DynamicTextSpanner #'dash-period = #-1.0


> I am never satisfied but I also would like to use it without
> having to add the '-' before the \mycresc command.  As I use \p , \f or
> \< without '-'.

No, that's not possible. LilyPond cannot have a function with arguments behave 
like that. If you want a command to take arguments, it will always need a -, _ 
or ^ before the command. That's a general restriction with the parser and also 
applies to many other functions.
Most notably, the \tweak command suffers from this very problem, too. See e.g. 
http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/Documentation/notation/the-tweak-command.html

> Should I say that it would be useful for many people to see this in the
> LSR and in the doc?

Yes, I totally understand. However, the LSR is (still?) based on lilypond 
2.12, so it's not possible to submit it there currently. And when it switches 
to 2.13, probably noone will remember submitting such snippets that show new 
functionality...

Cheers,
Reinhold

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org