Re: how close are we to having an "addAt" or "insertAt" feature?

[Alex Loomis]

How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter?

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi Werner,

> I suggest that such a command allows for a third, optional parameter,
> which makes \addAt relative to the `rehearsalMark' property.

If you’re talking about \mark \default, then I could see the benefit of that. The problem is, most of us overload \mark for a bunch of non \default stuff (e.g., ‘eyeglasses’, text instructions, etc.), because there’s no other mechanism available. And I doubt it would be easy to implement your suggestion “filtered” to only the \default marks.

But I’m always happy to be proven wrong!

Cheers,
Kieren.

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user