[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2
From: |
Colin Tennyson |
Subject: |
Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2 |
Date: |
Fri, 3 Jan 2014 09:28:38 -0800 (PST) |
Kieren MacMillan wrote
> You clearly come from a programming background, which will help you scale
> the Lilypond learning curve in some ways.
> However, don’t push that analogy too far, or you might find (as I did)
> that it can confuse matters. =)
Hi Kieren,
To use another analogy: our choir conductor sometimes asks in mild
exasparation: "Sing _something_ , never mind you're not sure. If you sing
the wrong note I can correct it, but if you don't sing at all I'm dead in
the water."
So, in asking questions here on this forum I allow myself to err on the side
of pushing.
(I'm not a programmer, but as you can tell from the terminology I picked up
I have been reading up on general principles of programming.)
In order to learn the LilyPond environment, I feel I need to know the
concepts that have guided how Lilypond is implemented.
The opportunity for parent-child relationships is obvious.
Systems consist of staffs, staffs are filled with notes.
So, is all the typesetting organized according to parent-child and
sibling-group relationships, or only some things and other things not?
Why do I see side by side two keywords for setting properties: \set and
\override.
I have seen environments where every property that is by nature ON/OFF is
controlled with a boolean variable. That is straightforward, that helps to
make the enviroment learnable.
Why do I see side by side several ways of toggling ON/OFF?
I see "\hide" "\undo \hide"
I see "consists" "\remove"
I see "##t" and "##f"
I wonder, how did the development of LilyPond end up with the syntax and
keyword set that it now has?
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Learning-Lilypond-comments-invited-part-2-tp157019p157057.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
- Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Colin Tennyson, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Noeck, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, David Kastrup, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Kieren MacMillan, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2,
Colin Tennyson <=
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, David Kastrup, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Noeck, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, David Kastrup, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Marc Hohl, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, David Kastrup, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Noeck, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Noeck, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Phil Holmes, 2014/01/03
- Re: Learning Lilypond, comments invited - part 2, Simon Bailey, 2014/01/07