On Wed 27 Jul 2016 at 07:57:29 (+0200), Malte Meyn wrote:
>
>
> Am 26.07.2016 um 20:34 schrieb David Wright:
> >>>What I didn't take into account is tuplet's optional argument for the
> >>>tuplet spanner duration.
> >Can you do this in compound time? What would be the syntax?
>
> Of course, you can use scaled and dotted durations like
> \time 6/8 \tuplet 7/6 2. { … }
> \time 9/8 \tuplet 10/9 8*9 { … }
OK, then in answer to your:
> I don’t have an idea for a good syntax here, any suggestions?
I would suggest an extension of the present syntax:
\tuplet [<some string>] <numerator>/<denominator> [<duration>] {
<notes-for-tupling> }
in other words:
\tuplet % No new command, so it doesn't
% trample on any other definitions.
[<some string>] % Optional, can be quoted in case
% it includes / or whitespace.
<numerator>/<denominator> % Syntactically unambiguous because
% of the obligatory /.
[<duration>] % Optional duration as at present.
{ <notes-for-tupling> } % As at present.
This would print tuplets as at present, but each tuplet would have
the string written against it instead of the normal default. The
string could be as simple as 3 or even "" for nothing.
What do you think?
Cheers,
David.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
