Re: Crescendo after custom dynamic marking

[David Kastrup]

Lukas-Fabian Moser <lfm@gmx.de> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Am 12.12.21 um 22:52 schrieb Lukas-Fabian Moser:
>>
>> Maybe I'm going too far in my belief that "standard tasks best
>> should not require # characters and scheme", but shouldn't we
>> provide a LilyPond syntax interface for this? It's not so uncommon
>> to want custom dynamic expressions after all:
>>
>> dynamic =
>> #(define-music-function (text) (markup?) (make-dynamic-script text))
>
> Thanks for your thoughts, everybody! Some questions/further thoughts:
>
> 1)
> Right, it should be an event function. In fact, it's currently _the_
> example of a custom event function in the documentation:
> https://lilypond.org/doc/v2.23/Documentation/extending/event-functions.html
> (which consequently should be replaced by something more interesting
> and less standard). But the remark in the documentation that, if one
> uses a music function instead of an event function, one would always
> have to use it with -/_/^, seems to be obsolete now.

No, it isn't.  Put \displayLilyMusic (or other music functions) before
either.  There is now a cleanup pass collecting loose pieces in
sequential expressions but it does not come in time for assembling the
arguments of music functions.

> In fact, the warning applies to 2.19.83, but not to 2.20, which
> surprises me (as I had thought that commits to 2.20 were a subset of
> those to 2.19.83.)

-- 
David Kastrup