Re: Possible bug with \oneVoice involving rests

[David Kastrup]

James <address@hidden> writes:

> On 02/06/14 17:38, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Yes, that's plausible, but your above reasoning about << >> remains
>> incorrect.
>>
>> Things are more readable if you revert to << >> only when you indeed
>> want parallel voices rather than just multiple notes in a chord.  But
>> they are valid nevertheless.
>>
> Does that mean using << >> without the \\ is acceptable or just an
> unfortunate side effect of (for want of a better phrase) not being more
> strict when parsing << >> without the \\?

Historically, there were

    \sequential { music list }
    \simultaneous { music list }

first.  Then easier to type equivalents

    { music list }

and

    < music list >

came.

Then chord notation was introduced as

    << chord constituents >>

and finally, there was the big change of swapping the syntax for chords
and for simultaneous music.

Quite later \\ was introduced as a shortcut for parallel voices.

Since we are obviously also using << >> in constructs like
\new StaffGroup <<
  \new Staff ...
  \new Staff ...
>>

This is not just a side effect.  It is the principal mode of operation.

-- 
David Kastrup