[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration? |
Date: |
Sun, 20 Mar 2022 07:23:30 +0000 (UTC) |
>>>>> A convert-ly rule would probably not be possible given the
>>>>> limited power of regular expressions. As such, \partial might
>>>>> need to support both duration and music arguments. Initially I
>>>>> thought this might not be possible, given that a naked duration
>>>>> can be treated as music; but the following does seem to work:
>>
>> ...
>> I wouldn't want to have to explain to users why these turn out
>> different.
>> \score {
>> \fixed c' {
>> \partial 4. 4.
>> }
>> }
>> \score {
>> \fixed c' {
>> \partial c4. c4.
>> }
>> }
>>
>
> Fair point, though the intention here would be that backwards
> compatibility would only need to exist for a time. A warning could
> be issued whenever a user applies the older syntax; this would
> inform the user of the impending breaking change while still
> allowing existing code to compile. When it is convenient, a future
> release would only support music as the argument.
What about providing a new command `\upbeat` and moving `\partial`
into oblivion? Compare this to `\tuplet` vs. `\times`.
Werner
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Aaron Hill, 2022/03/19
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Valentin Petzel, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Luca Fascione, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Leo Correia de Verdier, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Aaron Hill, 2022/03/20
- Re: Should \partial accept music instead of duration?, Jean Abou Samra, 2022/03/20