Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes: > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 09:45:09AM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote: >> So, \tuplet y/x with the exact meaning of \times x/y is less confusing >> because it's not "times" vs "time" anymore, and the straightforward >> fraction is just "music without the maths". So, I predict a widespread >> adoption. > > Do we really need to use the same fraction notation, though?
You mean, like 3/4 meaning 3 notes to 4 parts of a measure? > I mean, in music we see 3:2 (if people are being pedantic). I'd be > much happier with \tuplet 3:2 { } meaning the same thing as \times 2/3 > { } 3/2 is a FRACTION, which is a lexical item available as a music function argument. The proposed \tuplet implementations were presented as Scheme code that could just be used in a document without recompilation. In contrast, : is being used for chord and tremolo notation. It has no relation to music function arguments. The price for using it would be making \tuplet a reserved word specially treated in the parser and dealing with the interference of : with its other meanings in the parser, and having the command hardwired and not user-serviceable and not documented as a music function. That's not a reasonable price to pay for a one-off command. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel