Am 25.04.2015 um 13:58 schrieb Urs Liska:
Am 25.04.2015 um 13:33 schrieb carl.d.soren...@gmail.com:
Reviewers: lemzwerg, uliska,
Message:
Ok, so let me see if I understand what you are saying.
Unfortunately I'm not 100% sure if I understand your questions
correctly, so I'm not sure if my answers will make perfect sense to
you ...
When we choose to subdivide beams with a given baseMoment, there should
be a subdivision at baseMoment and at every even interval larger than
that.
So if we have a baseMoment of 1/32, we should subdivide at 1/32, 1/16,
and 1/8.
That depends on how you mean that.
Subdivisions should be present at each 32nd note hear, as 1/32, 2/32
.. n/32. But they should have different numbers of beams. But you can
also see that as "layered" subdivisions.
I think that could be a viable approach:
- start with the larges value (1/8) and determine all possible
subdivision points
(having 1 beam)
- go on to 16th notes and determine all possible subdivision points
(having 2 beams) and apply them to all where 1/8 didn't already match
- go on until you reach baseMoment.
In that context I'd like to raise the question if baseMoment really is
the appropriate property for configuring beamSubdivision or if it
shouldn't have a dedicated property. Changing baseMoment might have
side-effects on other aspects of the engraving that may or may not be
intended.
What would you think of the following interface:
\set beamSubdivision = ##t behaves as currently (fetch value from
baseMoment)
\set beamSubdivision = #(ly:make-moment 1 16) sets the division
frequency to an explicit value.
That way we
- don't need a new property
- decouple subdivision frequency from baseMoment
- don't break existing code
Urs
Urs
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
