|
From: | Olivier Biot |
Subject: | Re: User comments on R shorthand |
Date: | Sat, 23 Mar 2013 18:24:54 +0100 |
My opinion (as a somewhat-more-than-casual Lilypond user, and as a
contributor to another music software package [SuperCollider]): Any
change in syntax that will break prior usage should be considered
very, very carefully to be sure the gains are worth it.
The proposal is:
- Old: R2 == a full measure rest in 2/4 time
- New: R2 == *two* full measure rests in any time signature
That breaks backward compatibility.
I do agree with Kieren that it's annoying to have to enter durations
for full measure rests, when the duration of the measure is known
elsewhere. So I think some change, if possible, would be nice to have.
I think Joram's suggestion, R*n, makes a lot more sense. It's related
to the current syntax, just more convenient, and it doesn't break
existing uses since the parser can distinguish among all of the
following unambiguously:
R2 (a full measure rest in 2/4 time)
R2*2 (two full measure rests in 2/4 time)
R*2 (two full measure rests in any meter)
The fact that Kieren's original proposal would change the meaning of
the number immediately after R raises a red flag for me -- breaking
compatibility, confusing current users once they are forced to adapt
to the new syntax -- and the only gain over the second proposal is to
lose a * after R. That falls far short of the threshold to justify
breaking existing syntax, IMO.
I'm strongly against Kieren's original idea. I'm cautiously in favor
of Joram's alternative.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |