On Sun, 2015-04-26 at 16:34 +0200, Éloi Rivard wrote: > Ok thank you for those answers. I will continue my importer then and > ignores that the midi played is not what I expect. > > What do you think of making barlines (and special endings) some denemo > objects instead of lilypond ones. So when we would play the midi, it > would just produce the expected sounds without further command ?
We wouldn't want it to do that in general - it would take twice as long to listen to a piece that has repeats in the usual case which is listening to check for mistakes. To listen to a performance you can always get LilyPond to generate a MIDI file and play that with a MIDI player. > I saw some old pieces of code in relation. Yes, I moved away from hard-coding such things as only C programmers could contribute to it written that way. Instead, by making as much as possible the input display controlled by Scheme we were able to attract other users to code things like the dynamics and the tempo changes - these uses the midbytes field of the Denemo Directives to control the MIDI output to reflect the changes as well as using the graphic field to make the display reflect the input. To get the hard-wired MIDI code to respond to hard-coded repeat indications would again require working at the C code (which is my comfort zone too) and then any further tweaks that user's might want (I think I covered Da Capo and Dal Segno in d-Performance but not third time bars) would not get done for lack of scriptability. What would be better is to go in the opposite direction, reducing the amount of built-in stuff (slurs for example, are divided between those that are built-in and the phrasing slurs which are scheme). Then when new features are wanted (cresc. .... poco ... a ... poco for example) they could be done better than at present (where we cannot display anything between the start point and end point, which we can do for built-in things like slurs and hairpin crescendi). Is d-Performance working in all cases I wonder - I just tested a very simple example, but I never have occasion to use it myself, so it would be easy to imagine that with other developments it may have accumulated bugs. Would you like to extend it for 3 or more time bars? It would be possible to extend it to include arbitrary indications which you can have in the nth-time bar command - you would write the script to include some scheme data in the data field of the Denemo Directive that would tell d-Performance where to go to to play the next section. Richard _______________________________________________ Denemo-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/denemo-devel
