Re: PATCH: Improved tablature support

[Marc Hohl]

Carl Sorensen schrieb:
> On 7/16/09 9:56 AM, "Carl Sorensen" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>   
> > Marc Hohl has completed a patch for improved tablature support.  It is
> > available for review at:
> >
> > http://codereview.appspot.com/95059
> >
> > Please review and comment.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >     
>
> Marc,
>
> Here are some comments.
>
> 1) All regression tests should be \version "2.13.4" -- I'll fix that.
>   
Thank you!
> 2) Your regression test for the modernTab clef:
>   Doc header should say "four- to seven- stringed instruments", which means
> instruments having four to seven strings.  "four to seven stringed
> instruments" means four to seven instruments having strings.  Isn't english
> fun?
>   
Ah, I see. Yeah, english *is* fun, but sometimes I just stumble through
half-finished sentences in despite search of a missing word, but at least,
the work on lilypond seems to improve my english a bit.
>   You should demonstrate in the regtest that it works for four strings and
> seven strings, and that it works with various staff sizes.  You may want two
> different regtests -- one that shows variations in string numbers and one
> that shows variation in sizes.
>   
Ok, I will provide additional regtests.
> 3) Is it necessary (or desirable) to have both \deadNote and
> \deadNoteOn..\deadNoteOff?  Unless a whole piece is to be written in
> DeadNotes, I can't imagine that it's better to write
>
> \deadNoteOn e e deadNoteOff
>
> than
>
> \deadNotes{e e}.
>
> If there's no value to the On..Off pairs, then it's probably best to
> eliminate them.  But if there is value, we can keep them.  And I'm not the
> judge of value.  I'm just asking the question.
>   
Hm, I introduced the ..On/..Off pairs first, because this syntax seemed 
to be
"lilypondish"  -  and easier to read, especially if there are long 
passages played
palm mute- or dead note-style. The latter construct looks more like a
programming language to me (yes, in fact it is a programming language, but
as there are many users not familiar with computer programming, we should
avoid this in general - but this is rather philosophical here).

On the other hand, for a single dead note
\deadNoteOn e \DeadNoteOff
is way too complicated, and furthermore
< c \deadNoteOn e \deadNoteOff g > won't work, so there is need for the
second syntax.

> 4) Formatting nit on scm/tablature.scm
>
> line 125-128: I think it would look better to put all the arguments to
> ly:stencil-combine-at-edge on line 124.
>
> line 129-131:  I would like it better to have the last three arguments to
> the first ly:stencil-combine-at-edge call on line 125, nested to the same
> depth as the inner (ly:stencil-combine-at-edge call.
>
>   
I don't want to blame others here, but this piece of code was 1:1 copied 
from Neil's mail.
Shall I reformat it and send a new patch, or are there other 
possibilities to correct it?
> Other than that, things look good.
>
> Oh, BTW, Thomas Morgan is currently working on a new Parenthesize markup
> command that will be better than the current parentheses; it will draw the
> parentheses as slurs.  This may be something you want to use in the future.
>   
Great! This opens the possibilitiy of drawing parentheses around chords, 
isn't it?

Thank you.


Marc
>   
> > Carl
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     
>
>
>