One think I don't like, since I use a lot of tuplets, is the similarity between "time" and "times". Why not \tuplet 9/8 instead of \times 8/9 ?
2010/10/15 Janek Warchoł <[email protected]>: > Hi, > an idea about tuplets came to my head (and a quick seach suggested that it > wasn't discussed before). > In LilyPond we write durations in form of denominators, i.e. c4 = "c note > that lasts 1/4 the duration of a whole note", d16 = "d note with a duration > 16 times shorter than whole note" etc., but for the tuplets we need the > \times notation. Of course it works, but maybe we can make it simpler? > Why not use numbers other than powers of 2? For example, > c1 d3 e3 c3 d1 would mean c1 \times 2/3 { d2 e2 c2 } d1 > c3 d6 e2 would mean \times 2/3 { c2 d4 } e2 > c20 c c c c c c c c c e2 d9 d d d d d d d d would mean \times 4/5 { c16 c c > c c } \times 4/5 { c16 c c c c } e2 \times 8/9 { d8 d d d d d d d d } > and so on. > In my opinion it would be useful for simple tuplets - input would look less > cumbersome and would be faster to type. Of course for complicated tuplets > and some special uses old syntax should be used. > What do you think? > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user > > _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
