[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: music function semantics
From: |
Carl Sorensen |
Subject: |
Re: music function semantics |
Date: |
Sat, 30 Jul 2011 10:18:49 -0600 |
On 7/30/11 9:33 AM, "Jan Warchoł" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> I see...
> The more i think about it, the more i feel it would be good to merge
> \set, \override and \tweak into one thingy. Doing so would make music
> functions like above one quite simpler.
While I could see that perhaps we could combine \set and \override, we
cannot combine \tweak.
\override and \set modify everything at the current moment.
\tweak modifies only a single grob.
The distinction between \override and \tweak needs to stay because it is a
semantic distinction.
Thanks,
Carl
- music function semantics, David Kastrup, 2011/07/26
- Re: music function semantics, Neil Puttock, 2011/07/26
- Re: music function semantics, David Kastrup, 2011/07/27
- Re: music function semantics, Jan Warchoł, 2011/07/29
- Re: music function semantics, David Kastrup, 2011/07/29
- Re: music function semantics, Jan Warchoł, 2011/07/30
- Re: music function semantics,
Carl Sorensen <=
- Re: music function semantics, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/07/30
- Re: music function semantics, Jan Warchoł, 2011/07/30
- RE: music function semantics, James Lowe, 2011/07/30
- Re: music function semantics, Carl Sorensen, 2011/07/30
- Re: music function semantics, David Kastrup, 2011/07/30
- Re: music function semantics, Carl Sorensen, 2011/07/30
- Re: music function semantics, Jan Warchoł, 2011/07/31
- Re: music function semantics, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/07/31
- Re: music function semantics, David Kastrup, 2011/07/31
- Re: music function semantics, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2011/07/31