Hi David, thank you for your work on this! I will try/investigate it later this evening or tomorrow in the morning.
Best Jan-Peter Am 23. August 2017 18:33:15 MESZ schrieb David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > >> David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: >> >>> Jan-Peter Voigt <jp.vo...@gmx.de> writes: >>> >>>> Do you have another idea how to do that? >>> >>> Timing is established by iterators and they work on music >expressions, >>> not events. So you need to have an iterator in the race from the >start. >>> Few iterators have variable length. The sequential iterator can >have an >>> elements-callback delivering music expressions. Those can have a >>> structure and/or length determined at callback time. >>> >>> Kicking this into orderly operation does not seem like it would be >>> reasonably workable. >>> >>> Iterators are not user-definable at the moment. Either a general >>> facility or a more specific "wait-iterator" would seem warranted. >> >> You might want to use \lyricsto to add your private control context >to >> the Score context. When switching off everything that can track >> melismata, you might get woken up once per event regardless of how >long >> your actual expressions are. >> >> But it might make more sense to work on actual infrastructure for >this >> rather than fudging around with existing facilities not intended for >it. > >As an example: I've created a \waitFor music function that does >something similar to what you want. It was just quite useless in the >original state since it waited for a particular expression, and you >cannot use it to wait for \mark "B" when the mark has been generated >with \mark \default . > >It turns out, looking at it, that the C++ code already does something >more useful, namely taking the "procedure" callback for evaluating a >triggering condition. While the LilyPond code does not yet match the >C++ code: so I probably gave up for some reason after noticing that >this >still wasn't what I could be using. > >So this definitely needs fleshing out into something more useful. But >it illustrates the kind of iterator you likely want to be using: I seem >to remember that I was able to make the original version (before >fudging >the procedure callback into the C++ code) do something. -- Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
