Re: problems with learning lilypond

[Mark Polesky]

James E. Bailey wrote:
> Surely the calculations can be performed outside of lilypond,
> and then simply input into lilypond for a score, right? Or am I
> missing something?

Sure, but scheme can greatly facilitate things. I should clarify
that algorithmic music hardly represents the bulk of my LilyPond
work, but I mentioned it as an example of something the benefits
from scheme.

I'll try to respond differently to what you wrote earlier:

> Scheme is, as far as I'm concerned, what other people do to save
> typing. In fact, I'm of the opinion that there's no need to use
> Scheme, it's just there if you know how to use it. So, if you
> take Scheme out of the lilypond learning curve, it's actually
> not that difficult.

I think what David was saying in his earlier post
(http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-08/msg00323.html)
was that he's gotten to the level where he needs scheme to do what
he wants. As one example, if you need your slurs and ties to hide
behind time-signatures, scheme is absolutely required, as far as I
see it:http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=613

Scheme enables far more functionality than simply saving typing.
So if you find yourself needing scheme in LilyPond, you may very
well find yourself fighting its counterintuitive elements.

Certainly scheme isn't "required" to produce beautiful scores, but
I typeset a lot of contemporary music, and the demands of the new
notation are simply too great to avoid it. So, as I said, perhaps
it just depends on your typesetting needs.

- Mark