On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Rainer Dunker wrote: > On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 11:57:37PM +0100, taupin (wanadoo-lps) wrote: > > > Is there somebody who observes difficulties or slowing down when \including > > > musixadd? Otherwise it could IMO also be incorporated in musixtex. > > > > I'm really reluctant, once more, because of the problem of register > > consumption. > > This make musixadd and musixmadd not compatible with other register > > consuming packages, especially in LaTeX. Otherwise, MusiXTeX would > > become reserved for Omega users. > > Just an idea: What about having MusiXTeX use macros instead of > registers? Sure, this would make musixtex.tex's coding somewhat more > complicated, especially where calculations are to be performed, but in > many situations, macros behave just like allocated registers. I've done > this change with musixlyr, and in the end I was surprised how little the > necessary code changes actually were. > > <vision> Having overcome the register limitation, MusiXTeX could easily > be made capable of handling arbitrary numbers of instruments, slurs, > beams, etc. </vision>
Wouldn't changing from registers to macros dramatically affect the speed? For typing short pieces this shouldn't be a problem. But for rather big scores? I remarked already that adding lyrics to a piece using musixlyr considerably slows down PMXing and TeXing. regards Bernhard _______________________________________________ TeX-music mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://sunsite.dk/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
