lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Can't find right hand fingering without string #'s


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Can't find right hand fingering without string #'s
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2015 15:32:32 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux)

BB <address@hidden> writes:

> Thank you very much for the link! Right hand fingering very hidden at
> the end of the page! As one might see on the bottom of the page it is
> available in
> Other languages: deutsch
> <http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-fretted-strings.de.html>,
> español
> <http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-fretted-strings.es.html>,
> français
> <http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-fretted-strings.fr.html>,
> italiano
> <http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-fretted-strings.it.html>,
> 日 本語
> <http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-fretted-strings.ja.html>.
>
> I speak and read german, but I have set my internet to english and so
> I do not get german hits in my search.

The German documentation sadly is seriously behind the current state of
LilyPond.  I think it needs new translators.

> But still I would name that restricted syntax inconsistent.

I wouldn't.  And according to git-blame -w, I'm responsible for more
lines in lily/lexer.ll than Han-Wen and Jan together.

I repeat: Making c-p a single word in all modes was very much deliberate
and done in version 2.15.43.  See
<URL:https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2702>.

This means that identifiers like ragged-right work in all rather than
just some modes of LilyPond.

LilyPond's extensibility to a good degree depends on functions that can
be defined by the user, and those functions (as opposed to hard-wired
parser functionality) cannot switch between various parsing/lexing modes
at will.  So gratuitous syntax differences between modes cause problems
whenever a user-defined function has to deal with more than just music.

> Is there really an urgent need *not to allow* to exchange of the
> number, say in
>
> g-0\3
>
> by character
>
> g-i\3

Yes, there is such a need.  If you think that one can just stick useful
things into one corner of a computer language without other aspects
being impacted, I have a C++ committee seat to sell you.

And g-a\3 or c-c never worked in any version of LilyPond (since a and c
are note names when not wrapped into quotes).

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

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