Re: Re: 2.21.1 change of behavior of \compressMMRests?

[Valentin Villenave]

On 5/4/20, Mats Bengtsson <address@hidden> wrote:
> What was the rationale to recommend (and only mention) \compressMMRests
> instead of \compressEmptyMeasures in
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.21/Documentation/notation/writing-rests#full-measure-rests?

Well, precisely the fact that \compressEmptyMeasures is applied
blindly to all objects, not just rests.
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/3687/
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4375/

> In my opinion, it's a bit more cumbersome to use the music function
> syntax than the macro \compressEmptyMeasures

I actually agree. Having to wrap stuff into a music function doesn’t
make things easier.

In fact, \compressFullBarRests (or \compressEmptyMeasures) was no
longer explained nor mentioned *anywhere* as soon as
\compressMMRests{} was implemented, which is why I thought it should
deserve a proper explanation in a subsection of its own.

Besides, the similarity between \compressEmptyMeasures and
\compressMMRests remains unfortunate and prone to confusion. (I
actually toyed with the idea of naming one of them
\contractEmptyMeasures, then opted against it.)

> The situation with multi-measure note
> durations, described in your new subsection, should be extremely rare in
> practice

Apparently this may occur in some old editions. Can’t say I’ve ever
encountered one myself.

Since you’re much more experienced than I am in dealing with newcomers
and fundamental ease-of-use, please feel free to suggest what sort of
implementation may make things easier.

V.