On Wed 27 Jul 2016 at 07:57:29 (+0200), Malte Meyn wrote: > > > Am 26.07.2016 um 20:34 schrieb David Wright: > >>>What I didn't take into account is tuplet's optional argument for the > >>>tuplet spanner duration. > >Can you do this in compound time? What would be the syntax? > > Of course, you can use scaled and dotted durations like > \time 6/8 \tuplet 7/6 2. { … } > \time 9/8 \tuplet 10/9 8*9 { … }
OK, then in answer to your: > I don’t have an idea for a good syntax here, any suggestions? I would suggest an extension of the present syntax: \tuplet [<some string>] <numerator>/<denominator> [<duration>] { <notes-for-tupling> } in other words: \tuplet % No new command, so it doesn't % trample on any other definitions. [<some string>] % Optional, can be quoted in case % it includes / or whitespace. <numerator>/<denominator> % Syntactically unambiguous because % of the obligatory /. [<duration>] % Optional duration as at present. { <notes-for-tupling> } % As at present. This would print tuplets as at present, but each tuplet would have the string written against it instead of the normal default. The string could be as simple as 3 or even "" for nothing. What do you think? Cheers, David. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user