Re: \mark and slur

[David Kastrup]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Rutger Hofman <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> My preference would be to clearly explain that '(' is an attribute of
>> the note that directly precedes it.
>
> That's what the "loose post-event" bit is supposed to be about.
>
>>>> GNU LilyPond 2.21.0
>>>> Processing `sll.ly'
>>>> Parsing...
>>>> sll.ly:4:13: warning: Adding <> for attaching loose post-event
>>>>    \mark "X"
>>>>              (c4) c c c
>
> If you have a better proposal for the error message, let fly.

Note: another component that may possibly be included in the warning
message for this input would be "SlurEvent".  Would

>>>> sll.ly:4:13: warning: Adding <> for attaching loose SlurEvent
>>>>    \mark "X"
>>>>              (c4) c c c

be any better?  Or not mention the expedient of <> at all (might make it
harder for the user to figure out a workaround for his situation)?

>>>> sll.ly:4:13: warning: Cannot attach SlurEvent to preceding expression
>>>>    \mark "X"
>>>>              (c4) c c c

or for brevity

>>>> sll.ly:4:13: warning: unattachable SlurEvent
>>>>    \mark "X"
>>>>              (c4) c c c


-- 
David Kastrup