[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?
From: |
Valentin Villenave |
Subject: |
Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"? |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:58:43 +0100 |
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Neil Puttock <address@hidden> wrote:
> There's no harm in adding it, I suppose. I'm certainly not going to
> stick my neck out and declare it impossible, even if I don't have the
> faintest idea how it could be implemented. :)
Neither have I. The music-function's type signature seems to be
tightly binding...
There we go: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=935
> 4m48 vs 4m21
Hm, that's interesting.
Cheers,
Valentin
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, (continued)
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Graham Percival, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Mats Bengtsson, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, David Kastrup, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Neil Puttock, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Valentin Villenave, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Graham Percival, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Neil Puttock, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Valentin Villenave, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, Neil Puttock, 2009/12/15
- Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?,
Valentin Villenave <=
Re: why recommend \relative to take a "c"?, James Bailey, 2009/12/15