Re: \mark and slur

[David Kastrup]

Rutger Hofman <address@hidden> writes:

> On 14-09-17 15:57, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> 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
>
> This one comes closest for me. I think it could be helpful to also
> explain that the 'preceding expression' is not a note, and that that
> is required for a SlurEvent/slur? Or is doing this for all possible
> error scenarios a lifetime job?

This is a compilation warning, not a manual entry.  It should usually
fit one line comfortably.  Flagging the preceding expression as well
with a message of its own seems not helpful since there is nothing
actually wrong with it on its own and since it is, well, the preceding
expression.  It's directly adjacent.

>> or for brevity
>>
>>>>>> sll.ly:4:13: warning: unattachable SlurEvent
>>>>>>     \mark "X"
>>>>>>               (c4) c c c
>
> But this is just me; maybe others have different feelings.

Shrug.  Warning messages are no substitute for reading an introduction
into how to use LilyPond, and fallback behavior and suggestions will
usually be modelled on the assumption that people write code that is at
least somewhat similar to code as it should be written and is shown in
the manuals.

LilyPond's error and warning messages will never obviate reading a
tutorial.

So I'm not really excited about the importance of repainting this bike
shed and people who'd very much prefer it differently would be
well-advised to make proposals of their own rather than expecting me to
invest large amounts of time into proposals for which they can then give
performance points.

-- 
David Kastrup