Re: [GLISS] non-timed or non-musical events "z" "y"

[Graham Percival]

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 03:44:27PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >>> {
> >>>   \at 4 \<
> >>>   \at 1*2/3 \!
> >>>   c'1\p
> >>> }
> >> [12 days later, and no followup again]
> >>
> >> Let's just continue pretending me to be a naysayer then.
> >
> > You demonstrated that a solution is possible, but quite inconsistent with
> > the lilypond language: You have to write the dynamic BEFORE the note,
> > although it should be printed AFTER the note...
> 
> It is conceivable to cook up stuff that would allow to write something
> like
> 
> c'1\p-\at 4 \< -\at 1*2/3 \!

Really?  Wow, I wish you had replied with this when I wrote "
Now, if a music function can apply to the
current note, i.e.
  c1-\at{ s4 s s\f s }
then I'd be much happier." on 2012 Sep 13:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00597.html

> If you don't even bother to reply, how am I supposed to guess what your
> problem with my approach is?

Evidently Reinhold isn't the only person who doesn't "even bother
to reply".

> In my opinion, dynamics are one case where using postfix syntax was a
> mistake, exactly because they are not inherently associated with a
> particular note but rather a moment of time.

Are you speaking of the implementation or the music?  I consider
dynamics to be associated with moments of time within a voice.

> It is _that_ choice which
> does not really fit well with the general concepts of the LilyPond
> language, and in consequence dynamics are the _dominant_ example for use
> of <> and/or s1*0.  So my preferred path to a remedy would rather be to
> un-postevent stuff that does not really fit the postevent category
> rather than to mess with the timing relations of postevents.

Hmm.  Something like this:
  \p \accent( c4    \legato fis8.   \f )d16
?
(additional spaces added to demonstrate which commands go with
which notes)

- Graham