lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]

## Re: Documentation of Dynamics context and postfix dynamics changes (issu

 From: percival . music . ca Subject: Re: Documentation of Dynamics context and postfix dynamics changes (issue3732046) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 18:53:19 +0000

Quite nice for an initial patch.

For future reference, I would recommend working on slightly smaller
patches -- this would let us go through more rounds of draft+comment
faster, without you having to change so many examples when we clarify
bits of the doc policy.

http://codereview.appspot.com/3732046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely
File Documentation/notation/expressive.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/3732046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode313
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:313: \bar "||" e2\p\< f | e2\>
d\! | a2\< b | c1\decr s1*0\! \bar "|."
On 2010/12/20 15:22:30, Carl wrote:

I think it's far easier to keep place when the line is broken up as

Trevor

requests.  We need *logical* grouping in the lilypond input files.

Trying to

group the input files according to lilypond output is a nightmare

long-term.

Yes.

That said, we have sometimes used
\break
to get the desired output.  For example, you could have 4 bars, then a
\break
then another 4 bars.  If you do this, the \break should be on its own
line, and make sure that you don't try to pack a lot of notation onto
one line.

http://codereview.appspot.com/3732046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode319
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:319: or @code{\!} or its synonym
@{\endcresc}.
On 2010/12/20 10:57:44, Trevor Daniels wrote:

@code{\endcresc}


Yes.  I'm surprised that the code compiled with this error!

(and if you didn't check that it compiled before sending the patch, then
consider yourself lucky that I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt
here.  growl.)

http://codereview.appspot.com/3732046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode324
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:324: \bar "||"
On 2010/12/20 10:57:44, Trevor Daniels wrote:

drop \bar


I'll accept a \break instead, if Keith insists.

http://codereview.appspot.com/3732046/diff/1/Documentation/notation/expressive.itely#newcode341
Documentation/notation/expressive.itely:341: The commands
@code{\crescTextCresc}, @code{\dimTextDecresc},
Holy talking through the code, batman!

Delete this whole paragraph, and replace with
"
Textual marks can be produced instead of hairpins:
"

I'm willing to discuss this point, but I really don't see any benefit to
the verbosity.  The example is clear.  Trust your example.

re the example: what about using 4 durs instead of 2 ?  That way, each
line would be one bar.  Easier to keep track of.  Maybe divide the
example into two separate lines with \break.

http://codereview.appspot.com/3732046/