Re: Not Nice Review of the LilyPond

[J Martin Rushton]

On 02/12/18 11:31, David Kastrup wrote:
> J Martin Rushton <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> I'm not sure the single critical paragraph is that unfair.  I've turned
>> the tables on the reviewer and added my own comments as an amateur who
>> came to Lily only a few years ago.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> "LilyPond source files appear to be written in a custom programming
>> language whose grammar is never discussed."
>> - I'm afraid this one is bang on target.  However compare the situation
>> to other systems and at least you can programme rather than just
>> accepting a proprietary black box.
> 
> Well, this author went the mile and actually learnt how to work with
> LilyPond before giving it a critical eye (and apparently sticking with
> it).  I think we lose the majority of potential users even before
> getting anywhere as far.  It's easy to laugh about those when they write
> up their impression, but of course the problem _is_ real.
> 
> Frescobaldi is an impressive way to lower the threshold of getting
> acquainted with LilyPond's way of working.  And Denemo is nice for not
> getting all that much acquainted with LilyPond's way of working.
> 

Hi David.  I'm not quite sure whether you're telling me off for
criticising the original author, or praising me for as "this author"!
In either case may I concur with your comments about Frescobaldi - It is
a nice compromise between GUI/IDE/text and does make life a lot easier
for occasional users.  I was going to include Frescobaldi in my email to
Alethis but as I mentioned they don't seem to want to be contacted which
is odd for a "professional software consulting services".

Regards,

Martin

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature