Re: enharmonic problem with \transpose - should we modify it?

[Janek Warchoł]

2011/6/16 Benkő Pál <address@hidden>:
>> Summary: { \key c \minor  \transpose gis as { es } } produces feses in
>> output. I think it would be better if it outputted es.
>
> I think that
> - \transpose does the theoretically right thing
>  and should keep ignoring enharmony
> - \naturalizeMusic is far closer to your needs, it just have to be enhanced
>  to know the key in the spirit of modal transposition - it may even have a
>  parameter for the enharmonic interval (diminished second as default).
>  if I have time (and that's quite a big if) I'll mock up something.

Maybe i'll write something myself next week, especially if the result
would be included in Lily (i mean, not as a helper function in the
docs, but built in Lily). If you could write a very small example of
how to use key signature in scheme code it would help me much - i can
handle the algorithm, but writing scheme code is still some problem to
me.

>> I searched for transpose in sources and checked all results that were not
>> docs and regtests, but my scheme reading skills are too low: i cannot
>> identify where it is defined (i have an impression that it's definition
>> isn't all in one place). Please give me some pointers.
>
> it's implemented in C++
> (Pitch::transpose and ly_transpose_key_alist in music-scheme.cc).

Ah! I overlooked it because it was so simple :)

Thanks!
Janek