lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Gould &c. question


From: Simon Albrecht
Subject: Re: Gould &c. question
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:13:51 +0200

On 11.07.2016 19:39, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Simon,

Currently, it’s beamed by half-measure, which I think impairs legibility, so I 
introduced a patch changing this to beaming by quarter note value (issue 4919). 
An earlier request for opinions didn’t harvest any responses – would anyone 
like to chime in? :-)
1. I prefer the beams in quarters; or, at the very least, the 16th 
broken/subdivided by quarters.

2. Does Urs’s recent work have any bearing on this?

Good question. I can only guess that
1) this change only concerns situations with subdivideBeams = ##f
2) the subdividing code has no means of linking groups which were separately beamed beforehand. So the ‘subdivision at quarters’ solution is probably not possible with ((1 . 20) (5 5 5 5)) beaming. On one hand it’s a trivial change and easy to undo, but on the other hand it’s always an act to shepherd those small patches.
For me, these issues wouldn’t stand in the way of this change for now.

Best, Simon



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]