Re: Supporting my work on LilyPond financially

[R.D. Latimer]

I'm a retired school teacher, I know some C++, I'd  be happy to help out with dev if I can, though I may not know enough, but would be willing to try. I know some c++ and lisp/scheme and music theory. I have a Windows 7 laptop, Netbeans for C++ dev.  Let me know if there may be ways to help out with the development end. - thanks

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:29 AM, immanuel litzroth <address@hidden> wrote:

2) The contention was that this stuff would be easier in Sibelius. Not that you
can get it right there too.

Sibelius doesn't get things automatically right as well as Lilypond does, but it's usually much, much easier to correct or customize them when it doesn't give you what you want, which in turn means that it's easier to get what you want in general.  But the lack of automation does make you vulnerable to idiots who don't do proper quality control or who have no clue about what is wanted.

I don't know if you use or have used Sibelius, but if you're judging it solely on the grounds of the bad parts you get from bad suppliers, you're not really assessing the software at all.  The real measure of engraving software shouldn't be, "How readily does it stop an idiot from getting it wrong?" but, "How readily does it let a user achieve the notation they want to achieve?"

For the record, I'm not speaking out in favour of Sibelius in any general sense here.  I just think that one should try and understand why it is that software like this has the user-base and staying power that it does.

I've tried Sibelius and Finale (way back...) and I far prefer Lilypond to both. But I'm a C++ programmer that uses emacs 10h/day,

I might be a little eccentric :-)

Immanuel

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user