Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - Draft 3

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> writes:

>>> We are talking about writing \tuplet 3:2 { ... } instead of \tuplet
>>> 3/2 { ... } here.  Whether tuplets are central or not, this
>>> single-character difference is purely cosmetic, and it is
>>> well-known that obsessive-compulsive cosmetic surgery is not
>>> exactly guaranteed to maximize the obtained output of beauty.
>> 
>> Uh, it /sounds like/ you're suggesting that Werner has
>> obsessive-compulsive disorder.
>
> No, it doesn't.  Just think of who is going to do the surgery :-)
>
> Regarding the cosmetics, I think we should always think of the user:
> It is a matter of fact that triplets are either marked with a single
> digit, or with a ratio like `4:3'.  I think it is not too far
> stretched to expect that lilypond should follow such conventions even
> in the input.

If you want a version working _without_ surgery, let \tuplet
_alternatively_ accept a _quoted_ _string_ "4:3" as argument.  \tuplet
will then need to parse this string itself.  If you want to be cute,
override the printing method for tuplet numbers to show "4:3" in this
case.

However, forcing a certain form of input representation for a certain
form of output is a nuisance for programmatically generated music.

I'd rather recommend using something separate like
\tupletStyle "3:2", \tupletStyle "3", \tupletStyle "".

I have _no_ problem with : in _this_ context since it now does not
represent a musical/mathematical concept but indeed a graphical
representation.  In fact, I would _protest_ against using
\tupletStyle "3/2" 
for creating a 3:2 tuplet number.

-- 
David Kastrup