Re: Symmetric slur input

[Janek Warchoł]

Hi,

2013/8/7 David Kastrup <address@hidden>

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>> I don't think that distributing ( and ) between standalone event and
>>>>>> post-event respectively is a concept that will carry the day
>>>>>> sufficiently to be given a chance at a comeback.  It would make
>>>>>> (c (d) e)
>>>>>> visually confusing.  While neither the current
>>>>>> c( d)( e)
>>>>>> nor the standalone event version
>>>>>> (c )(d )e
>>>>>> will win a price for prettiness, they both beat (c (d) e) in conveying
>>>>>> meaning rather than looking pleasing.
>>>>
>>>> What about considering ( as a post-event and ) as a standalone event ?
>>>>      c( )d( )e  is symmetric and very clear.
>
> c()d()e is a pain in the ass, and we got rid of it in the 1.8-2.0
> syntax change. It is a pain in the ass, because when copying music,
> you have to remember to put some adornments (ie. the ')' ) before the
> note, while most go after the note.

Example?  While I am apparently preparing the ground for historic
reenactments, we'll want to convey some of the original horror, and I
don't get it yet.

Do i understand correctly that http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3487 would change slur syntax from c( d)( e) to c()d()e ?

I have to say that i don't like c()d()e.

best,
Janek