On 03/06/2014 05:26 AM, Vesa wrote: > I'm a bit of two minds whether we should do anything about this, I > think LMMS's way may actually make more sense from the perspective of > electronic music making... the lower part (denominator) could maybe be > constrained to actual binary exponents, (1, 2, 4, 8...) but keep the > function otherwise the same.
Actually now that I think about this, I think this is one thing we could do before 1.0.0 (since it will break backwards compatibility): modify time signature so that the denominator is constrained to binary exponents, like it is on actual time signatures. Time sigs that LMMS allows - such as 5/9, 3/11, etc. - make no sense as time sigs, and they cause weird behaviour, because they produce tact lengths that don't correspond to any actual note sizes (apart from the tick-sized 192th notes...) The upper part could still be whatever between 1-32, but the lower part should have no need to be anything other than 1,2,4,8,16 or 32. Toby, what do you say? It'd be a relatively simple thing to do, maybe break some backwards compat (if anoyne has actually ever used those weird uneven sigs), but it's better to break it now than later, and it would make things much easier for us in the long run. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce. With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works. Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
