[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Not Nice Review of the LilyPond

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Not Nice Review of the LilyPond
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2018 12:31:06 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

J Martin Rushton <address@hidden> writes:

> I'm not sure the single critical paragraph is that unfair.  I've turned
> the tables on the reviewer and added my own comments as an amateur who
> came to Lily only a few years ago.


> "LilyPond source files appear to be written in a custom programming
> language whose grammar is never discussed."
> - I'm afraid this one is bang on target.  However compare the situation
> to other systems and at least you can programme rather than just
> accepting a proprietary black box.

Well, this author went the mile and actually learnt how to work with
LilyPond before giving it a critical eye (and apparently sticking with
it).  I think we lose the majority of potential users even before
getting anywhere as far.  It's easy to laugh about those when they write
up their impression, but of course the problem _is_ real.

Frescobaldi is an impressive way to lower the threshold of getting
acquainted with LilyPond's way of working.  And Denemo is nice for not
getting all that much acquainted with LilyPond's way of working.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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