Re: Patch for LaTeX lilypond-syntax change

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

Am Dienstag, 20. April 2010 18:47:27 schrieben Sie:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:31:11PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
> > I'm beginning to think about the \cresc, \dim
> > and \decresc text commands again. Shall we really wait that long?
> 
> Good point.  What was your opinion on \newcresc again?  

I don't like it.

> I remember
> somebody suggesting it, and I think I remember somebody pointing
> out some problems with that approach... 

Yes, I pointed out the problems:
-) I don't like the idea to introduce a temporary command, which will need to 
be changed in the next major version, again.

-) "newcresc" is misleading, it would only introduce a new command name, but 
fix \cresc to something it should have always been, anyway

-) \cresc, \dim, etc. are not even documented, so I don't see any reason to 
make so much fuss about these commands. In particular, the documentation only 
introduces \<,\>,\cr,\decr (which are all equivalent forms for hairpins in 
postfix notation). For text crescendi, the \crescTextCresc prefix setter 
commands are documented. But the prefix \cresc, \dim, \decresc commands are 
never even mentioned (I checked the 2.10, 2.11, 2.12 and 2.13 documentation).
Only the ly/spanner-init.ly file contains their definitions together with the 
comment 
    % STOP: junkme!


> but if we could add the
> new functionality without changing the old commands, that would be
> ideal.

I don't really see the point in keeping old, broken commands, which are not 
even mentioned, much less described in their shortcomings in the docs.

Cheers,
Reinhold

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org