Re: scheme music function going backwards in time (or"better mp dolce") [solved]

[Graham Percival]

On Sat, 4 Oct 2008 17:57:08 +0100
"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:

> 
> Graham Percival wrote Saturday, October 04, 2008 4:29 PM
> 
> >I have an announcement to make: I'm an idiot.
> 
> No need to announce it ;)  But if you are so are most
> of us.

Ack!  You figured out my secret reason!  I am undone! :)

Reinhold: hey, I've never called a translator an idiot.  Other than
Valentin, that is -- he's a special case.  :)


> > This version of the files now do the following:
> > - commands are placed after the note they belong to -- ie
> >  \pdolce behaves just like \p.  Except for the "dolce" part. :)
> > - commands use the correct amount of horizontal space.
> 
> Clever!  How can you think you're an idiot?  (But then,
> you didn't really, did you?)

Well, check out this thought process:
1) yay, I can use \displayMusic to figure out how to translate
  \once \override DynamicText #'X-offset = #-1
  c4\mpdolce
  into scheme!
2) oh, that doesn't work when I shove the scheme into \mpdolce.
3) Of course; you can't use \override inside a chord, which is
essentially what c4 (scheme-function) \mpdolce  turns into.
4) hmph.  I can choose to either dump the \mpdolce before the
note, or lose the horizontal placement.  (that was a week ago)

... during the past week: this is so stupid.  I mean, I have the
correct \override command in scheme, I have the mpdolce in scheme.
Why can't lilypond just apply that override to the next item?  I
mean, they're in the same scheme function!  I wonder if I can
break the c4 music event so I can shove the \override in front of
it, re-instante the c4, and add the \mpdolce.  Maybe somebody
could add a "take apart the previous music function" to lilypond
before 2.12...

5) oh wait, this is *exactly* why \tweak was invented years ago.
And... wow, a \tweak command is even simpler than an \override
command in scheme.


I had all the pieces together, but I was still flailing around
trying about really exotic solutions (taking a music event
apart?!).


> The only problem is that the dynamics of the new
> commands are not reflected in the MIDI output.

Hmm... I can't get concerned about that.  I guess that somebody
writing piano music might care, but since I write for strings and
strings are so hard to synthesize, I never use MIDI for anything
other than note-checking.

If somebody can come up with an elegant solution for this, I
wouldn't mind merging it -- but as you say, it'll probably require
a much more complicated function and/or top-level score override.

Cheers,
- Graham