Re: some observations from a new user

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Having never used lilypond, or played a musical instrument before.

This is an interesting starting point.

> To say the least, lillypond grammar is a nightmare.

Hmm.

> From a programmers point of view the cord notation is ok. The angle
> brackets wrap around the notes that are to be played.
>     <e g>2.
>
> Beams do not follow this form however. The start of the beams is
> marked at the end of the first note it covers, and ends after the
> last note. For example :
>     e8[ f g h]
> it might be more elegant and consistent to express it as :
>     [e f g h]8
>
> The same applies to slurs
>     c( d e) would become (c d e)

Early incarnations of lilypond did something similar.  However,
experience has showed -- this is, typesetting a lot of scores -- that
a consistent postfix notation is far easier to typeset manually.

> Why \new Staff and not just \Staff?

The keyword `\new' creates something, while `\Staff' refers to it.

> The difficulty and inconsistent grammar

What's inconsistent?  Contrary to other `programming' languages, only
angle brackets and braces are grouping elements, while brackets and
parentheses have a different usage.


    Werner