Re: Fix issue 4355 -- broken beam subdivision (issue 226700043 by address@hidden)

[Benkő Pál]

2015-04-25 10:20 GMT+02:00  <address@hidden>:
> Thank you for picking this up. It is certainly an improvement already.
>
> However: In an example where 8 32th notes are subdivided by 16th notes
> ony the first and third subdivision should have two beams, the second
> one only one beam.
>
> Put differently: when there is following a total of an eighth note's
> worth there should be only one beam, even when that total is itself
> subdivided into two sixteenth notes. (Presumably that logic should be
> propagated to the situation of (nested shorter notes): when 16 64th
> notes are subdivided by 32ths the divisions should should have the
> following number of beams: 3-2-3-1-3-2-3.

could you formulate this more generally?
e.g. what to do with 12 32th notes?

p