[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?
From: |
Christopher Heckman |
Subject: |
Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration? |
Date: |
Sun, 20 Mar 2022 01:26:37 -0700 |
On Sun, Mar 20, 2022 at 12:44 AM <lilypond-devel-request@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2022 07:23:30 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Werner LEMBERG <wl@gnu.org>
> [...]
> > Fair point, though the intention here would be that backwards
> > compatibility would only need to exist for a time. A warning could
> > be issued whenever a user applies the older syntax; this would
> > inform the user of the impending breaking change while still
> > allowing existing code to compile. When it is convenient, a future
> > release would only support music as the argument.
>
> What about providing a new command `\upbeat` and moving `\partial`
> into oblivion? Compare this to `\tuplet` vs. `\times`.
>
>
> Werner
... Or you could use the brand new command \upbeat when music follows,
keep \partial, and you don't have to worry about backwards
compatibility.
--- Christopher Heckman
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, (continued)
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, David Kastrup, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Aaron Hill, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Valentin Petzel, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Luca Fascione, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Leo Correia de Verdier, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Aaron Hill, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/03/20
Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?,
Christopher Heckman <=
Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Christopher Heckman, 2022/03/20