[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Lilypond Syntax Development and 3.0

From: Reinhold Kainhofer
Subject: Re: Lilypond Syntax Development and 3.0
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 17:09:45 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.11.4 (Linux/2.6.28-13-generic; KDE/4.2.4; i686; ; )

Am Montag, 27. Juli 2009 12:22:33 schrieb Graham Percival:
> Reinhold and Frederick: as you may have guessed, I'm proposing
> that your patch waits until 3.0.  

How about splitting up the patch into backend (i.e. supporting the spanner-
type and -text property of the crescendo event in the engraver) and frontend 
(the new definition of the \cresc command). I'd really like to get the 
functionality into lilypond (i.e. the backend), since I'm currently preparing 
Urtext editions with lots of "cresc." ( 

That way, one can always define one's own \mycresc function that creates a 
crescendo event with the corresponding properties set, while the \cresc 
command still shows the old inconsistent behavior.

> Anything requiring such manual
> tweaks will make some people very unhappy, such as mutopia.

Yes, anything that requires manual changes (or even automated changes) is a 
real PITA if you are seriously working on larger music editions.

> This also serves as test of developers: we've avoided getting
> "pinned down" with the input syntax because that would limit
> development.  How do you two feel about your hard work on the \cr
> stuff being delayed by up to a year?

I don't mind that much, it just that I rely on properly working text crescendo 
syntax locally, so I would probably not do much lilypond development if I 
needed to keep the patch locally... I would be exclusively running my own 
branch, so any patch to master would require quite a lot of work.

Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden,
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 *, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting,

reply via email to

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