Re: Microtonal accidentals

[Keith OHara]

Joseph Rushton Wakeling <joseph.wakeling <at> webdrake.net> writes:

> Specifically in relation to the Helmholtz-Ellis notation -- some of those 
> accidentals would play very badly with existing Lilypond transposition 
rules.
> 
> The double-sharp-up-arrow (i.e. approx +5/4 tone) and double-flat-down-
arrow 
> (approx. -5/4 tone) would clash with the hardcoded transposition rule that 
sees 
> any accidental pitch alteration greater than 1 tone rewritten to a new 
staff 
> pitch with smaller alteration.
> 

For a long time LilyPond preserved the triple-sharp alteration
(still complaining if there is no glyph defined to print that alteration).
This was changed, maybe by accident, with another bug 
<http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1009>

I searched and found only one complaint about the old behavior, a
parenthetical remark in 
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2009-04/msg00649.html>
and there is a documented function to reduce g-triple-sharp to a-sharp
when it is desired, so I proposed to back out that change.