[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Strange message with autochange

From: George_
Subject: Re: Strange message with autochange
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 00:24:19 -0800 (PST)

Mats Bengtsson-4 wrote:
> Well, if you manage to describe how that should work. If you imagine 
> yourself in the role of the autochanger, how would you react if somebody 
> else did some extra staff changes every now and then. When should you 
> start doing your ordinary job after such a change?
> What might make sense, in such a situation, is the possibility to 
> temporarily turn off the autochange functionality in the middle of a 
> score and then turn it on again some measures later. I wouldn't be 
> surprised if that's already very easy to do, since most of the 
> functionality is implemented in Scheme.
>     /Mats

Well, say if, for starters, the autochanger was given options to a)
recognize rests as notes, and b) be given a wider threshold to change; for
example, if on the upper staff, you could make it so that it didn't change
until it had gone down to, say, an A or a B, and ditto for maybe D, or E,
from the bottom staff. If they were overrides, then that would be quite
useful, because then you could switch them on and off at will.

Also, how about if the autochanger was able to take some user action in its
stride, and if said user action violated one of its inbuilt rules, it
accepted the user's decision and kept mum about potential errors for
consecutive notes until the situation changed? For example, if the
autochange function had moved two bars' worth of notes onto the wrong staff,
then if I changed it, then the autochanger would automatically apply the
manual change to the next note, and all consecutive notes thereafter which
was affected, until a note crossed the boundary again?
View this message in context:
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]