Re: Proposed new available and recommended behavior of \relative

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Wim van Dommelen <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Compared with the \clef behaviour, I see this variant:
>>
>> melody = { \relative c='4 d e f g f e d c \absolute c,, d,, e,, f,,
>> g,, \relative c=' d e f }
>
> I think this may be technically impossible (or at least ugly,
> inelegant, prone to errors, weird exceptions and unpleasant
> surprises).

Is that your own opinion, or are you just reciting my standard reaction
to syntax change proposals?

> Currently David seems to be the only one who can actually jugde this
> sort of things

I surely hope not.  But I might be the one pickled most about them.

> i think we should trust him if he says that wouldn't be feasible.

Well, if we look at it in "temporal order", I have not had a chance to
voice my infeasibility rant for this particular proposal before your
comment.  I did so a few minutes ago, however.  If you had delayed
sending your posting until then, it would have avoided the impression
that I am awfully predictable.

On the other hand, there might be some correlation between "this looks
like something David would call a bad idea" and something being a bad
idea that is significant beyond what can be attributed to the "not
invented here" syndrome.

-- 
David Kastrup