Re: elementary macro problem

[David Kastrup]

address@hidden writes:

>> On 07/21/2017 04:36 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Basically, to give \repeat the kind of pliability that music functions
>>> enjoy, one would need to come up with different syntax/semantics for
>>> alternatives.
>
> How about \repeat volta 2 { c1 d1 e1 \alternative {{d1} {f1}} }?

> IMO, that makes more sense both syntactically and semantically - the
> way I see it, that example is four measures repeated, with the last
> measure being different. With the current syntax, it's three measures
> repeated, and... wtf is going on there at the end? It doesn't make
> sense.

That would be sort of my favorite as well.  It would allow putting
\alternatives in music variables/expressions syntactically independent
of \repeat and would solve a few lookahead problems we have currently.

> That would also allow support for volta brackets in the middle of a
> repeat without fiddling with repeat-commands, and would allow it to
> work with \unfoldRepeats as well.

Not sure about that, though.

> The only problem I see with that syntax would be placing the repeat
> barline correctly between the last volta brackets, but there are far
> more complicated pieces of magic already. There's also the problem of
> backwards compatibility to consider. I don't know what Lilypond's
> stance is on that.

convert-ly should be able to deal with most of that.

-- 
David Kastrup