lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: No R in input! (Proposal for discussion)


From: Simon Albrecht
Subject: Re: No R in input! (Proposal for discussion)
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2017 23:45:12 +0200

Am 02.04.2017 um 22:48 schrieb David Kastrup:
Suppose someone™ made the effort
and folded Multi_measure_rest_engraver into Rest_engraver, why would
such an engraver be fundamentally able to take just one type of rest
and Do The Right Thing™, using ordinary rests or MMRs where
appropriate?
Because it wouldn't be the right thing to change one for the other.

Now that’s what I wanted to discuss – sorry for insisting. r and R are /engraved/ differently, but – thinking outside the box – as far as I can see, there is no semantic difference. Nor can I think of a usecase which requires distinguishing them in a way that couldn’t just as well be done automatically. I’m curious: does anybody have one?

Best, Simon

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]