>|> But can you modify an existing source in whatever notation >|> you do like so that >|> >|> + one of the instruments is transposed >|Yes, PMX can do that. >|> + one of the instruments is set in tiny notes >|Ditto. >| >|> + two of four instruments are discarded >|M-Tx can do that. >| >|> + the order of some of the instruments is inverted >|M-Tx can do that, provided that the source uses only >|labelled lines.
Great. So \TransformNotes makes such transformations easy for MusiXTeX users. >|I wrote M-Tx 0.10 almost 20 years ago in Turbo Pascal. >|If I did it now, the input language would be nearly >|identical, but the implementation would have been in Lua, >|requiring just one \usepackage in LuaLaTeX. >| >|The same argument, but fortissimo molto con brio, applies >|to much of MusiXTeX. It's totally amazing what Daniel, >|and Werner, and Rainer, and you, and others, could do >|with the early-1980's 7-bit typesetting language called >|TeX. But it's over 30 years later, and TeX nowadays has >|a built-in scripting language. Rather than continuing >|to demonstrate what marvellous airs can be played by a >|virtuoso on a violin with only a G-string, the resources >|of the modern synthesizer called LuaTeX, which even >|tone-deaf teenagers can play with one finger, should be >|exploited. And if anybody is capable of understanding the code for MusiXTeX and duplicating the functionality in Lua, I'd be delighted. But it's not me. >|You've already given us a pure LuaTeX implementation of >|musixflx, eliminating the manual three-pass system. Don't exaggerate. The 3-pass system is still there, but the second pass and the overall processing are now system-independent scripts rather than compiled programs or system-dependent scripts. Re-writing *TeX* code in Lua will be quite different than re-writing C code or shell scripts in Lua. Bob ------------------------------- [email protected] mailing list If you want to unsubscribe or look at the archives, go to http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tex-music
