[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: cross-staff versions of \arpeggioArrowUp etc.

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: cross-staff versions of \arpeggioArrowUp etc.
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 23:19:35 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Mark Polesky <address@hidden> writes:

> Mark Polesky wrote:
>> Otherwise, does this look good?
> I'm sorry to keep doing this, but I keep finding ways of
> improving this. Now I think users should find this very
> intuitive, although the internal workings are more complex.
> I've attached the most recent version, which includes an
> annotated example at the bottom, which explains the behind-
> the-scenes operations.
> Anyone want to have a look at it?
> Anyone have any comments/suggestions?

Ok, since I was the one originally complaining, it seems appropriate to
say something here: I have to admit that I have never needed an
arpeggio, let alone a cross-staff one.  I have, more or less, reacted in
a keyword-triggered manner: the original proposal sounded like something
that was rather hard and unintuitive to use, and like something that
required so much manual tweaking that it would not adapt itself well to
changed conditions (autocombined staffs/voices and similar).

Lilypond should IMO aim to describe more the music than its
representation, since the act of casting the music into a representation
is conceptually Lilypond's task.

It would appear that your work has improved the user interface
considerably, where it looks like an implemented feature rather than a
bunch of twiddling knobs sticking out.

I have no idea how robust this feature will work in combination with
other features and/or extensions, and how well the internals of Lilypond
have lent themselves to the implementation, or resisted.  So I don't
have enough of a clue to figure out further areas of queasiness.

Since this construct is not used all that often, it is my guess that
worthwhile feedback will trickle in rather slowly after the feature has
been published and documented, from the rare user that actually needs to
exercise it.  I am glad to know that it will be there in a reasonably
user-comprehensible way, should the need arise for me.  And it is, after
all, something which meets a need particularly in piano music (I don't
play piano), so the current dearth of feedback does not mean that doing
this well was merely an academic exercise.

All the best

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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