Re: get and print current clef

[David Kastrup]

Paul Morris <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote
>> I am leaning towards redefining
>> 
>> clef =
>> #(define-music-function (parser location type) ((string?))
>>    (_i "Set the current clef to @var{type} if specified,
>> or force a repetition of the current clef when @code{\\default}
>> is given instead.")
>>    (if type
>>        (make-clef-set type)
>>        #{ \set Staff.forceClef = ##t #}))
>> 
>> which then would allow using \clef \default.  
>
> Good idea.  Thinking about the wording, what about \clef \current
> instead?

Not negotiable:

> I see that \default already works here, although I don't know why.  (I
> couldn't find \default in the manuals.)

<URL:http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/extending/scheme-function-usage>

Yes, it's underrepresented in pretty much _all_ manuals.

> One reason \current is clearer is that the "default" clef when a clef
> is not specified is always the treble clef.  Anyway, just something to
> consider.

We already have \key \default for a similar purpose.

> Here's something else to consider.  Should the following display the second
> bass clef?  
>
> {
>   \clef bass
>   c1
>   \clef bass
>   c1
> }
>
> For example, I can see users asking "Why do I have to use \clef \default? 
> Why can't I just enter \clef bass again?  Why doesn't \clef always display a
> clef?"
>
> Hmmm... are there any cases where you'd want to enter \clef ... but
> not display a clef?  (I realize that changing this behavior would
> entail more significant code changes than \clef \default.)

\clef treble ... \repeat unfold 2 { \clef treble ... \clef bass ... }

You don't want to see the treble clef in the first unfold of the
repetition.

Also instrument definitions may contain a clef.  When invoking a
particular instrument that happens to use the same clef as previously,
you don't want to see a clef repetition.

-- 
David Kastrup