Re: TimeSignature with note in denominator

[Aaron Hill]

On 2021-11-12 4:22 pm, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> > except that the Scheme expressions
> > '("4" . ("4" "8"))
> > and
> > '("4" "4" "8")
> > are entirely equivalent
>
> Well that’s inconvenient (and somewhat confusing/unintuitive).

When you consider how lists are represented in Scheme, this is entirely 
expected.

A list is formed by cons-ing the first element of the list with a list 
containing the rest of the elements.  (This is why a list is also 
considered a pair.)  Note this construction is recursive, with the list 
containing the rest of the elements being built in the same manner.  At 
some point, you will have the last element of the list.  This needs to 
be cons-ed to something, in particular the null or empty list as there 
are no other elements after the last one.

Manually specifying a list in this way is possible, albeit a little 
verbose.  Using list or the quote shorthand makes for less typing, but 
it is useful to always think of the long form as what is going on.

;;;;
(cons 'lorem (cons 'ipsum (cons 'dolor (cons 'sit (cons 'amet '())))))

(list 'lorem 'ipsum 'dolor 'sit 'amet)

'(lorem ipsum dolor sit amet)
;;;;

The quote shorthand, by the by, makes a distinction between a list and a 
pair by use of a period for denoting paired elements.  Also while proper 
lists terminate with the null list, it is possible to construct a 
so-called "dotted list" that does not.

;;;;
'(a . b)    ; =>  (cons 'a 'b)
'(a b)      ; =>  (cons 'a (cons 'b '()))

'(a b . c)  ; =>  (cons 'a (cons 'b 'c))
;;;;

The main takeaway here is that cons-ing an atom and a list with the 
intent to create a pair will also result in creating a new list.  Scheme 
does not make any distinction.


-- Aaron Hill