From b4bc86cb744a009a11d42e5f17d76356a49750e9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: fred Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 19:34:08 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] lilypond-0.0.38 --- Documentation/faq.pod | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/Documentation/faq.pod b/Documentation/faq.pod index 79e511498e..8cb445e23c 100644 --- a/Documentation/faq.pod +++ b/Documentation/faq.pod @@ -6,6 +6,20 @@ FAQ - LilyPond FAQs Some questions that have been answered before. +Q: Gee, I really like MPP, why would I want to switch to LilyPond? + +A: The design of MPP is broken beyond repair: it is very difficult to +enhance MPP, and any working version is (probably) bug-ridden. + +Every once in a while, I have a major attack of hybris, and I go in to +enhance MPP. I usually end up thoroughly frustated within an hour or +so. I concur, it does work but extending MPP is a major pain. + +We will not sacrifice development time on something else than the most +trivial bugfixes. If you insist on using MusiXTeX, then LilyPond is +not for you, and you might try PMX which does also nice output. + + Q: Why are [] around the notes, and () inbetween? A: [] designate beams, a note can only be in one beam at the same @@ -20,13 +34,13 @@ Q: I want a DOS/NT/W95 port. A0: Reconsider. Try Linux. It's fun! A1: Currently (patchlevel 27), LilyPond (and flowerLib) compiles, links -and runs on windhoos-nt, using the cygnus gnu port (release b17.1). +and runs on Windhoos-NT, using the CYGNUS GNU port (release b17.1). I (JCN) only had to make a minor workaround for missing library calls. Have a look at http://www.cygnus.com/gnu-win32. To make LilyPond type -make $OS. (I am not promising to maintain this platform, it is just that +C. (I am not promising to maintain this platform, it is just that when having to use doze, i-m sometimes too lazy to reboot.) -A2: I haven't had time to find a GCC crosscompiler (*with* g++, mind you) to +A2: I haven't had time to find a GCC crosscompiler (I g++, mind you) to DOS/win (in rpm, please :). @@ -34,6 +48,7 @@ Q: Why GPL? A: Yes. + Q: Why shouldn't I put all commands (\clef, \meter) inside the music? A: You should do what you like, but at some time we will enable @@ -53,8 +68,10 @@ simple front end to the complicated internals. Q: Why do I need g++ >= 2.7? A: By using g++ LilyPond is portable to all platforms which support -g++ (there are quite a few). Not having to support other compilers -saves us a *lot* of trouble. LilyPond & FlowerLib uses: +g++ (there are quite a few, more than platforms which have AT&T CC or +Micro$oft C++). Not having to support other compilers saves us a I +of trouble. You need a version better than 2.7 because LilyPond & +FlowerLib uses: =over 6 @@ -81,3 +98,26 @@ named return values =back +Q: Why do I have to tell LilyPond explictly that the lowest-line-note +is "es" if I am using the key of "bes"? + +A: The goal of lilypond (and MPP) was to design a language which +conveys the I message of a piece. That is the reason that it +does not ask you to enter the line on which the note is is. (Or the +"natural" note-name without any "es" or "is" postfix) + +We do realise it is a bit shortsighted of us to assume that any user could +readily read the music he/she is entering. We might extend LilyPond to +allow "programmable" intervals, keys and clefs (and thus give him a +means to build his own scales, custom etc.). + +For now, you can program LilyPond to use custom notenames and do + + notenames { ces_key_notenames } + music { $ % music in the key of ces + ... + $} + notenames { dutch_notenames } % restore default + +as an ad-hoc solution. + -- 2.39.5