[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Alternative to setting beatStructure

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Alternative to setting beatStructure
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 01:09:10 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux)

"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:

> Some time ago, around Nov 2011, David folded $(set-time-signature ..)
> into the \time command, see 
> a512132fed73a94068b91fb0bab473319e477b6e.  
> This change also provides an alternative to \set Timing.beatStructure, 
> one which seems preferable to me.  The use of the new \time command 
> is undocumented other than its use in a couple of snippets, for example see
> Conducting signs measure grouping signs in
> http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/beams#setting-automatic-beam-behavior
> Should we document this use of \times in the main text, making changes like
> this?
> \relative c'' {
>   \time 5/16
>   c16^"default" c c c c |
>   %\set Timing.beatStructure = #'(2 3)
>   \time #'(2 3) 5/16
>   c16^"(2+3)" c c c c |
>   %\set Timing.beatStructure = #'(3 2)
>   \time #'(3 2) 5/16
>   c16^"(3+2)" c c c c |
> }

The one thing that I am unhappy with is that we have a separate
\compoundTime command.  I don't have a good idea for folding both of
them into a single command, though.  Not without sacrificing the
beatStructure argument (unless we do really annoying things like making
it negative, or using a vector, or using a "2+3" string).

But while there is no different syntax in sight, there is no real excuse
for not documenting the current one.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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