Hi,
About enharmonicity:
2011/6/20 Benkő Pál benko@gmail.com:
with an algebraic pitch representation the test and adjustment would
look like as follows:
two pitches are enharmonic iff their interval is in the subspace spanned
by the enharmonic interval (default: diminished second) and
Hey,
lilypond-devel complained about the recipient list of this message,
so I am resending it. Sorry for those who are receiving it for the
second time.
-- Forwarded message --
Hello everyone,
First of all, thanks for the extensive comments made on this. I will try to
address
Hi,
In fact, this patch is divided in a few commits in my local branch.
The ones which change the pitch representation are most of the
diff. The rest are trivial additions that enable the new notation
to be used.
If this patch is approved, there will be no problem in separating
the work in two
Hi Carl,
The denominators are not implicit.
They are set in the file scm/lily.scm via the call to ly:set-default-scale.
Also see lily/scale.cc, lily/include/scale.hh and lily/pitch.cc:89
for how this is implemented.
ly/makam.ly gives an example of how to modify the denominators.
If you need
Hi,
A new patch set was uploaded, now including the scm files.
On 10 February 2011 20:32, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks! Regtests look fine, and there's nothing obviously wrong with
the code.
However, none of the scm files managed to get uploaded. I remember
hearing about
Uploaded. Please check if it is all right now.
2011/2/10 Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com:
Hi,
In fact, yesterday's make key cancellations independent of extraNatural
introduced a simple conflict with my patch, which I have just resolved.
Other files were automatically merged
Hello,
A new patch set has just been uploaded. Sorry for my delay.
Felipe
2011/1/29 Felipe Gonçalves Assis felipeg.as...@gmail.com:
Right,
I will have a look at that.
Thanks!
Felipe
On 28 January 2011 12:17, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Felipe,
I'm very sorry about
Right,
I will have a look at that.
Thanks!
Felipe
On 28 January 2011 12:17, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Felipe,
I'm very sorry about the delay, but at least I'm looking at it now, and
I'll take care of badgering people to review it once it's ready.
Unfortunately due to the
Hi,
Are you using a two-element list, or a cons cell? The two are not the same.
I seem to remember looking in the code, and seeing scm_cadr calls, which
implies that your alterations would be (1 -1), not (1 . -1).
In scheme I am using a cons cell, in C++ I am using a new struct with
On 31 December 2010 04:43, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_soren...@byu.edu writes:
If we are going to move to a list for alterations, the list should probably
be rationals, rather than integers, in order to be most general. Thus it
should most likely be (1/2 -1/4), rather
2010/12/31 Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com:
On 30 Dec 2010, at 23:16, Felipe Gonçalves Assis wrote:
I made a proposal for a representation, and there is Haskell code available
if you are interested.
Hi Hans. I would very much appreciate that code. I should remark
that your emails are what
Thanks for the code, Hans!
There are many things I am curious about. Now that I have the sources,
I will spend some time analysing them, and then contact you.
While I need some time to study your considerations, what I can say now is:
. If, under a given musical system, what is printed on the
Ok, Carl,
You vote for a list of integers, with arbitrary length.
There is actually no complication in not specifying its size.
Te midi engraver, for example, would just ignore entries
for which no value was specified. And in transpositions,
the unspecified values would just be considered zero.
Hello,
I will be away for about three days, so you might have to wait
for replies to any questions to me addressed. When I'm back
I'll read every post in this thread, and answer the relevant
questions.
Happy New Gregorian Year!
Felipe
___
Hello,
Issue 1278 (http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1278)
clarified that, in order to support some microtonal notations, LilyPond
needs to use a different pitch representation.
I am willing to make that happen. Of course, this will require some
contribution from more
So, first question
1. How should we represent alterations?
It is clear to me that the most general representation would be as
a list of integers of arbitrary length (see sections 1 and 2 of the
attachment).
However, a fixed length list might be more realistic. In my patch,
I opted for a pair of
Hi Carl,
Hi, Felipe.
I've looked at your patch, but I'm having a bit of trouble seeing how the
patch resolves the issues that are identified in issue 1278.
I must admit that i've not yet fully understood Hans's emails on issue 1278.
How do your new two-element alterations improve the
Hi,
I have just updated my local repository, and noticed that this
patch introduces a compilation error.
In fact, there is an undefined variable in lily/cue-clef-engraver.cc:175
(compare with lily/clef-engraver.cc). I am attaching a simple patch
that solves the issue, but you might want to
Hi,
In the attached snippet, the call to ly:set-default-scale has no
effect on the midi result, both in the stable and development
versions.
I believe that this is due to Pitches being constructed before
the new default_global_scale is set (see files lily/pitch.cc and
lily/scale.cc), so that
19 matches
Mail list logo
