While writing this text here, I am trying to remember how I learned lilypond, and what was the information that I was missing the most. So, my typical score will exercise most of the basic features of lilypond, but probably just very few of the advanced ones. For reasons of copyright, I don’t publish these scores.
Lilypond place plus#
That is, a song absolutely must fit on one page, and you want to see global structure, chords, voice plus perhaps some extra snippets for a typical instrumental or vocal accompaniment, or break. I should add that my application area is writing scores in the style of “real books” (for jazz and rock), to be used in a hobbyist band.
Certainly a musician is capable of structured thinking? Music is structure that you can hear. So, the following is my attempt to explain lilypond in a “semantics first” way.Īnd I do think this kind of documentation would serve both groups of users well. We can infer some of the underlying semantics from that, but the description is mixed with implementation detail that a plain “user” does not need. There is a subset of lilypond documentation targeted at programmers that want to extend lilypond. (Of course there are enough under-documented programming languages and libraries out there, but I avoid them.) I find that lilypond docs are lacking in structure and exactness when compared to definitions of general or domain specific programming languages that I usually work with. I am a professional computer scientist and a hobby musician (at best). It seems that the documentation targets (semi) professional musicians that are hobby programmers (at best). I find it difficult to infer from that the underlying principles of the semantics of the language. Most of it consists of examples that show syntax and semantics of individual features. In the words of the authors, “ LilyPond is a music engraving program, devoted to producing the highest-quality sheet music possible.”
0 kommentar(er)
