Re: No pf dynamic marking in dynamic-scripts-init.ly

[Janek Warchoł]

2011/9/17 Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden>:
> Am Saturday, 17. September 2011, 15:29:45 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
>> >> I added the variable definition pf = #(make-dynamic-script "pf") to
>> >> my ly source, but is there any reason why this should not be added
>> >> to dynamic-scripts-init.ly?  That already contains fp as a dynamic
>> >> marking, why not pf?
>> >
>> > I don't see why it couldn't contain more permutations of 'p', 'f'
>> > and even 'z' (I seem to remember that I had to manually create a
>> > dynamic for a few pieces that had things like szfp or sfffp (or
>> > similar - I cannot remember).
>>
>> IMHO, this unnecessarily pollutes the macro namespace.  Just imagine
>> that someone wants to define a macro which prints `Pianoforte' in some
>> way, and she decides to call it \pf just to discover that this name is
>> already taken...
>
> Where's the problem? You can always override already used command names...

I'm also in favor of including more names by default.  I know that
it's easy to add \pf in your own source file, but it unnecessarily
makes things more difficult for beginners.  After all, Lily should be
about "automated music engraving" ;)
However, this is a topic for GLISS anyway.

cheers,
Janek