On 12/18/09 10:57 AM, "David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Carl Sorensen <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> On 12/18/09 9:52 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Carl, you wrote Friday, December 18, 2009 4:21 PM
>>>
>>>> On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> A question. Does your code require autobeaming
>>>>> rules to be defined for beams of every possible
>>>>> duration? I ask because the following example beams
>>>>> inconsistently, and I'm not sure if this is due to your
>>>>> code or differences in the autobeaming rules for 4/4 and
>>>>> 2/2 time signatures. With a32 instead of a64 a64 the
>>>>> beaming is fine.
>>>>
>>>> The current design is that unless a beaming rule is specified for
>>>> a given
>>>> duration, the default beaming rule is used.
>>>
>>> I mentioned this example because the beaming with
>>> your patch is inconsistent when the 64th notes are
>>> present because they cause the rule for 32nd notes
>>> to be ignored. This is a change from the previous
>>> behaviour.
>>
>> Actually, the code now correctly breaks the beam in response to the
>> rule for the shortest note in the beam, rather than for the *last*
>> note in the beam.
>
> If I understood your explanation correctly, your code would not break
>
> {
> \time 2/2
> \repeat unfold 16 c'64 \repeat unfold 16 c'32
> \repeat unfold 16 c'64
> }
>
> symmetrically with the current patterns since it would connect the first
> two quarters and keep the last two quarters unconnected.
Yes, that is correct.
Mind you, I don't think that outcome is correct (and I don't think it makes
any sense to have 64th beams beamed longer than 32nd beams). But it would
happen that way with the current default beam settings.
The current default beam settings for 2/2 are clearly wrong.
Thanks,
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
