On Wednesday 01 September 2004 22.20, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Sorry for the late reply
To me it makes sense to notate bar lengths by example (i like in general when you can show what you mean by example; that way you don't have to learn a new complicated syntax).
But there is a major problem: How would you tell the difference between e.g. 3/4 and 6/8?
With a property you could define a default which can always be overridden with \time.
ok.. so the standard is to reduce as much as possible, and then there is a list of pairs (duration . time signature) saying that when the bar length is "duration", then "time signature" should be used?
Hello,
speaking about reduction, can I propose one more time my idear about lighter syntax for tuplet, something like a macro ?
Here is the link to my last post :
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2004-02/msg00114.html
Since "{ }" are used for music expression and "[ ]" for manual beam why not use "#" or any other sign, or nothing (ok, I know, frog eater have strange idear :o) ?
To resume, something like that :
a8 #2/3# r b d g b a8 g16 #6/7# a f d r b g Or that a8 2/3 r b d g b a8 g16 6/7 a f d r b g
would stand's for
\times 2/3 {a8 r b} \times 2/3 {d g b} a8 \times 6/7 {g16 a f d r b g}For me it's not unreadable and we can save mutch time. Most people (me) don't know how to creat shortcuts with their editing program and since lily is getting better, I think that we gone be more and more. Saving taping time is good for lily.
The only problem I see is for syntax highlighting (and time coding).
Thank's
Olivier -- Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
