(no subject)

[David Raleigh Arnold]

       =========  petals for lilypond  =========           petals.txt
                    
petals ver 020113.  (c)2002 David Raleigh Arnold free under GNU etc etc
etc. Needs GNU gawk, bash with a read command that works.         

That's it except lilypond. :-) Be sure to make petals executable, and
put it where your project is for now. It will split your score into
notesfile-pt1.ly, notesfile-pt2.ly, etc. notesfile is where you create
the notes to go in your \notes blocks. A \notes block, after the
boilerplate of your choice and inside the curly brackets, can have
\include "masterpiece-pt1.ly" in it instead of notes. Your .ly file,
unless it is very very short, should not contain any notes.

Have a working .ly file that \includes notes instead, and you can copy
your "masterpiece" score as "excerpt" and generate parts to run as a
finished product, or instead you might put a skip typesetting into one
of your parts, or you might just add semicolons to the first line of
your score. To make dummy files, all you need is more semicolons. For
editing, you might want to have alternative versions of your .ly file
also, \including different parts in a different way, or comparing
certain voices one staff over another, or the same voice using different
macros to hide something or not. If masterpiece.ly contains no notes,
you never have to reconcile these .ly versions, since they contain no
data. Your lilypond file can be prettified and organized and  understood
much more easily if it has no data in it.

;;;;;;; this is one measure with 8 voices, including this sentence.

It would be a good idea to define a measure skip in your .ly file:

ms = \skip 4*6

or whatever, to use \ms (or something) for measure skip.  If you prefer,
you can put a skip of 5 measures in one line and leave the next four
lines blank in that field. The point is that each field in the score is
a line in the part, but not necessarily one that contains a measure--or
anything. You can use barchecks, no problem. You could use the editor's
keyboard macros to write blank measures in a part.

\skip 1         ;; \skip 1              ;; \skip 1
\skip 1 ; \skip 2 ; \skip 1     ; dummy ; \skip 1

You don't change how you write parts, and you can more easily write them
one at a time, or two at a time, or all at once, and revise them all at 
once, too.

write this ;;;
and this ;;;
and this ;;;
and this ;;;

write this ; then this ; or go this way... ; to here
and this ; and this;;
and this ; etc.;;
and this ;;;              

The easiest way of suppressing parts temporarily is with semicolons (FS)
added or removed from the first line of your score. The record separator
(RS) is a newline, but it doesn't *have* to be. If you want to have more
than one line of text in a measure, you need to change the RS, the
record separator. The RS should *begin* a line, otherwise it may print.

Use an editor that can do a column copy easily, like cooledit, or try a
program called 'join" which may make it possible for you to combine
parts into a new petals score, to pick up that symphony that got bogged
down.

There is a great opportunity to insert filtration at the redirection
point here, to expand macros not subject to the perusal of lilypond,
ly2dvi, TeX, LaTeX, or scheme. This would make it unnecessary to have so
many of your own personal personal macros that you need includes, and
make it far easier to prepare a small .ly  file for a bug report or
appeal for assistance. It also would make it  possible to have something
like @bm(yournumber) or $bm(yournumber) be able to write in the -ptn.ly:

    \property Voice.Beam \set #'staff-position = #(yournumber) 
    
Can anyone tell me what program to filter with which will use a hash
table to make simple substitutions?

'gawk' is *wonderful*, but it doesn't take bash arguments to choose 
which field to print, so I couldn't figure out how to make a loop to do
it, so brute force was used. To do more than 30 parts, just add lines to
the program. I doubt the wisdom of using names for the parts not based
on the name of the source score, so I gave up on that pretty quick. Of 
course you can rename and save your parts, but don't, except to
construct a new score of course.