[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: PATCH: Improved tablature support

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: PATCH: Improved tablature support
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:19:26 -0700
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 08:51:42PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> Carl Sorensen wrote Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:32 PM
>> And if we're ever going to move it to a postfix operator (which is one 
>> of
>> the goals of the GLISS project), now is the time, before we get a  
>> strong
>> codebase of music function applications.

Yes, this is planned.  It's been on my list of discussions to
introduce when the website/build stuff is finished, for about two
months now.

> I'm beginning to wonder whether this is a
> desirable objective, after all.  There is
> already a large set of pre-defs which by their
> nature must be placed before the notes which
> they affect - all the \twiddleOn \twiddleOff
> pre-defs for example.
>  Then all the commands
> are pre-fix operators - \new, \relative, \clef,
> etc.  We can't change any of these.

One of the general principles which I was going to propose during
GLISS is that any tweak which affected multiple notes would go
before the first note, whereas any tweak which affected a single
note would go after the first note.

Alternately, we could move to having everything postfix apart from
basic stuff like \new, \relative, and \clef.

> Now we see a great advantage in writing music
> functions - they're easy to write and can be made
> to work inside and outside chords.  But they
> have to be pre-fix from their nature.

They don't "have to be".  They currently "are".

Again, I don't think this is the right time to introduce this
discussion, but I guess we could do so anyway.

- Graham

reply via email to

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