Re: Compound time signatures

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

Henrik Frisk wrote:
> Pedro Kröger <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
> > Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> >
> > > I think it would also be better if the code just used numbers, and does 
> > > a (format "~a" NUMBER) or (number->string NUMBER) in  the end.
> >
> > Here it is. I also made Graham's suggestion of switching the numbers,
> > like (compound-time grob 3 16 5 8). This is a very cool example (thanks
> > Henrik!). I think the ultimate would be to merge the 2 functions and or
> > detect the behavior automatically or have it passed as a keyword (like
> > compound-time :equal-div)
>
> All these suggestions make a lot of sense, and thanks Pedro for implementing it 
> and thanks for clarifying let* as compared to define. The code looks better! I 
> will take a look at the autobeaming suggested by Graham. I also thought about 
> merging the two functions. Rather than using a keyword, if the function is 
> called with divtwo==0 use equal divisor. In other words: (compound-time grob 3 
> 8 5 8) would result in 3/8+5/8 and (compound-time grob 3 8 5 0) would give 
> 3+5/8 (as I believe it's a matter of taste what way you want to notate it). 
> Does that make sense? Maybe a keyword makes it simpler to understand?

Have you considered using optional arguments?

 (define (func a b . rest)
   ..
   )

rest is a list containing the rest of the arguments.

BTW, can you adjust your mailreader to break lines at 72 columns? When I 
answer you, I get your text in a single-line paragraph.



--
 Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen