Re: LilyPond talk in German at Chemnitzer Linuxtage

[Valentin Petzel]

That’s what I’ve got from this too :). Personally I think the greatest thing 
with Frescobaldi is the great integration between editor and viewer, with fast 
forward and reverse search and even marking selected source code in the 
viewer. This makes syncing between parts much easier. I do not care much about 
midi, but what kind of turns me off about Frescobaldi a bit is the lagginess 
(all that functionality comes with a price I suppose), the syntax highlighting 
and the lack of features of the actual editing component and the general 
instability with lack of restoration features. E.g. when I use Frescobaldi 
using seach occasionally crashes the program, which then requires you to 
recover unsaved changes from the files in /tmp Frescobaldi put there the last 
time you compiled the score.

So currently I’ve switched to using KATE configured to compile the file when I 
save it. I can tile the windows to have Okular show the Score or a manuscript 
by the side, point and click works out of the box (even if it is a bit slow). 
This allows me to write long scores much faster than I’d be able to in 
Frescobaldi. So while I respect the capabilities and features of Frescobaldi I 
can unstand someone not using it.

I think maybe a nice thing would be to use the python library for a lilypond 
LSP?

Regarding midi support:  Personally I’d do this externally. Create an external 
program that records midi, either quantised real time or stepwise, and returns 
the output as Lilypond code. This then has the advantage that it is easier to 
maintain and can easily be used by whatever editor you want to use (as long as 
the editor in question allows you to call an external program and insert the 
output).

Cheers,
Valentin

Am Sonntag, 12. März 2023, 12:22:14 CET schrieb David Kastrup:
> Valentin Petzel <valentin@petzel.at> writes:
> > Hi David,
> > 
> > one important thing this talk has taught us is that you are not too
> > fluent with Frescobaldi :).
> 
> You bet.  But I still considered it a saner choice to showcase compared
> to Emacs (which is what I use).
> 
> Maybe someone™ should just use all of the libraries Frescobaldi uses for
> parsing LilyPond stuff to bootstrap a first Emacs mode worth its salt.
> 
> I also discovered that the Frescobaldi documentation talks about Rumor
> integration while in the actual editor Rumor support appears to have
> been replaced by native MIDI support with less functionality.
> 
> The native MIDI support would require recording of timing information to
> facilitate better chord/note distinction and quantisation support.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.