Simon Wascher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello, > > there is no reason to reject ::| and :::| notation as far as I see. > > Additive complementary constructs (intriguing to me) could be: > > :<"text">| > > and > > :<numeral>|
<assume rest of proposal is included by reference> I second this proposal. I have a lot of pieces where :3| would be extremely useful. Right now, the alternatives are: 1) unroll the repeats (convert |: abcd :3| to |abcd|abcd|abcd|) 2) Turn the repeated section into a part, and use P:A3 to get the repeats Neither are particularly good. The first both eats up lots of space and hides what's really going on. The second can get rediculously complicated. I have on piece which has several parts, each of which would be :3|. So I have P:A3B3C3D3E3F3, which is rediculous. I would also like, if possible, to be able to do |: |: ... :3| |: ... :3| :3|, but I can probably live with P:(AB)3 in that case. -- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] "I will not die an ironic death" -- Scott Ian, lead singer for the metal band Anthrax, after bioterrorist attacks using anthrax. To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
