Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hey team, This message bounced because of the size of the attachment, but I wanted you to see it anyway (without attachment). Thanks, KIeren. On Mar 2, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Jan-Peter (et al.), Your edition engraver is amazing, IMO.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, I added a function editionMMod, which takes a list of positions. Spectacular! Thanks. I’ll continue applying your edition engraver to my real-world files, and see what else comes up. Hopefully, we’ll soon be able to give this to the rest of the community at large, in a truly

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, sorry, I missed to mention the zero-based counting Yeah, that was probably an important point to bring to my attention… ;) To add the empty barline, if there isn't one already, would be very nice. We should try to make it possible. That would be great! The other thing that

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, I added a function editionMMod, which takes a list of positions. Function name and argument order should be chenged ... For now, the position-list replaces measure and moment. So \editionMod FTE-vocalbook 5 0/4 FTE-vocalbook-A.Score.A \break should be equal to \editionMMod

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hi Jan-Peter, Thanks for the detailed response! I will answer more , when I left all infections behind, which my children brought from school and kindergarten … =\ Although my 3½ year old daughter has had several bouts of

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

On 28.02.2014 09:43, David Kastrup wrote: Although my 3½ year old daughter has had several bouts of “day-care-itis” — and my wife picked it up several times — I’ve fortunately avoided all sickness this season. Well, as long as it isn't the six-legged variant of day-care-itis... ;)

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, On 28.02.2014 02:53, Kieren MacMillan wrote: Although my 3½ year old daughter has had several bouts of “day-care-itis” — and my wife picked it up several times — I’ve fortunately avoided all sickness this season. Best wishes, that it stays that way and that your wife is not

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, now my family had to leave me here alone … Sorry to hear that… On the bright side, that means more uninterrupted Lilypond time! ;) So the ‘test’ in '\addEdition test’ is not related to the ‘test’ in ‘my.test’? I am going to produce examples with more meaningful names. No

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi again, Any explanation for why \editionMod edition-engraver-name 2 1/4 edition-name.Staff.A \break doesn’t work? What’s the proper code? Allowing arbitrary break points like this is a killer feature for your edition engraver! =) Thanks, Kieren.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, Am 28.02.14 17:01, schrieb Kieren MacMillan: Hi again, Any explanation for why \editionMod edition-engraver-name 2 1/4 edition-name.Staff.A \break I thought, it should work also in the Staff context. But it should at least work, if you address the Score context. \editionMod

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, I thought, it should work also in the Staff context. Since many of my compositions recently are polymetric, that would be a great feature. (It would be particularly good if it automatically broke the other Staff contexts mid-measure, without me having to add \bar “” every time…)

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, Answered my own question: this doesn’t work for me: \editionMod edition-engraver-name 2 1/4 edition-name.Score.A \break It needs rather to be \editionMod edition-engraver-name 2 0/4 edition-name.Score.A \break [!!] Onwards and upwards. Kieren.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, sorry, I missed to mention the zero-based counting. We will propably find more of those black spots ... you are the first one, with whom I talk about using it ;) Well, fever is decending and I will have a cup of hot tea and some aspirin. In my first versions, I used one-based

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, Am 27.02.2014 04:44, schrieb Kieren MacMillan: Hi Jan-Peter, ... Are you interested in taking up that challenge? =) yes, I am :) And I will answer more , when I left all infections behind, which my children brought from school and kindergarten ... I would love a dead-simple,

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, Thanks for the detailed response! I will answer more , when I left all infections behind, which my children brought from school and kindergarten … =\ Although my 3½ year old daughter has had several bouts of “day-care-itis” — and my wife picked it up several times — I’ve

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, - if you use it without any template mechanism, you have to assign proper edition-engraver id-paths - I can't say, what that means in production. - right now it is just ripped out of my working framework and might or might not work as expected ... but this doesn't need to be

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Found another worthwhile optimization making a difference (basically, not discarding and regenerating a blob that is going to get analyzed next anyway). In your use case where almost all changes happen in the same large file, this does make a bit of a difference, in particular regarding the

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Bah. Got only 50% off, and a third of the rest is system time. At least an artificial test case went from 40 seconds to 2, but that is only a 95% reduction, so still a far cry from what I fantasized. And the wortliste

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes: And the wortliste still takes more than 6 minutes on my computer: Which is not even a factor of 3 as compared to previously: But even that is an large improvement. It's now unbearable and no longer unusable :-) So since much of the load appears to be

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes: For better or worse, I am currently focusing on speeding up git blame which is braking down lots of people. Excellent! If you want a test case from the dark side, try http://repo.or.cz/w/wortliste.git Wrong URL,

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes: Bah. Got only 50% off, and a third of the rest is system time. At least an artificial test case went from 40 seconds to 2, but that is only a 95% reduction, so still a far cry from what I fantasized. And the wortliste still takes more than 6 minutes on my

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

And the wortliste still takes more than 6 minutes on my computer: Which is not even a factor of 3 as compared to previously: But even that is an large improvement. It's now unbearable and no longer unusable :-) Werner ___ lilypond-user

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmillan at sympatico.ca writes: What would be involved in developing a feature to add notes or tweaks at an arbitrary moment within a music expression? e.g. global = \repeat unfold 100 s1 music = \addAt (4 3/8) \global \once \override

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Keith, Am 21.01.2014 05:56, schrieb Keith OHara: There is, of course, the simultaneous music construction with music = \global { s1*4 s8 s8 \once\override Score.RehearsalMark #'X-offset = #-1 \mark A } { s1*11 \mark12 } { s1*29 \mark30 }

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, Am 16.01.2014 03:16, schrieb Kieren MacMillan: 1. What — if any — drawbacks are there? - if you use it without any template mechanism, you have to assign proper edition-engraver id-paths - I can't say, what that means in production. - right now it is just ripped out of my working

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Werner, what will you do with, say, 100 \addAt entries after inserting an additional bar? A replace script? In any case, since it would be an optional parameter, it wouldn’t hurt anyone to have it in there… As long as the syntax is clear and easy as to what is and is not a “mark” for

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi David, How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter? What do you mean? Neither \mark #4 nor \mark G mess with the counter. The point is that, if \addAt (or whatever) is “relative to marks”, then

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, - if you use it without any template mechanism, you have to assign proper edition-engraver id-paths - I can't say, what that means in production. I know you have a well-developed templating system… I wish I had time to look at it. 2. I want to change the output in context A

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hi Mike (et al.), What would be involved in developing a feature to add notes or tweaks at an arbitrary moment within a music expression? music = \addAt (4 3/8) \global \once \override RehearsalMark.extra-offset #’(-1 . 0) we’re about

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi all, So a half-day's work is more like the estimate for every single further fix making the timing simulation work closer to what iteration would do anyway. Well, then… tell me the real cost, and I’ll see what I can do to [help] sponsor it. There is *NOTHING* I can think of which would be

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes: Hi all, So a half-day's work is more like the estimate for every single further fix making the timing simulation work closer to what iteration would do anyway. Well, then… tell me the real cost, and I’ll see what I can do to [help]

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

For better or worse, I am currently focusing on speeding up git blame which is braking down lots of people. Excellent! If you want a test case from the dark side, try http://repo.or.cz/w/wortliste.git For historical reasons, the `wortliste' is a single, large file instead of smaller ones.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org writes: For better or worse, I am currently focusing on speeding up git blame which is braking down lots of people. Excellent! If you want a test case from the dark side, try http://repo.or.cz/w/wortliste.git For historical reasons, the `wortliste' is a

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Kieren, James and all, I extracted my edition-engraver from lalily. The example compiles here with 2.18. You can try this and comment ... I will add more comments to the code, if this is of interest ;) The compilation creates a file example.edition.log containing all edition-engraver paths.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter? On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hi Werner, I suggest that such a command allows for a third,

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Alex, How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter? Meh… I don’t really like the original suggestion (of a RehearsalMark-relative \addAt parameter), so it makes little sense to me. Cheers, Kieren.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Jan-Peter, I extracted my edition-engraver from lalily. This seems so magical as to be almost unbelievable. =) 1. What — if any — drawbacks are there? 2. Why is this not exactly (or even a superset of) the \addAt feature I requested? Thanks! Kieren.

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter? I'm all for it! Meh… I don’t really like the original suggestion (of a RehearsalMark-relative \addAt parameter), so it makes little sense to me. So

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Alex Loomis thebluemusic...@gmail.com writes: How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter? What do you mean? Neither \mark #4 nor \mark G mess with the counter. -- David Kastrup

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Am 16.01.2014 06:35, schrieb David Kastrup: Alex Loomis thebluemusic...@gmail.com writes: How much sense would it make for there to be a separate \mark-style command that functioned identically but didn't mess with the counter? What do you mean? Neither \mark #4 nor \mark G mess with the

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Werner, I suggest that such a command allows for a third, optional parameter, which makes \addAt relative to the `rehearsalMark' property. If you’re talking about \mark \default, then I could see the benefit of that. The problem is, most of us overload \mark for a bunch of non \default

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hi Mike (et al.), What would be involved in developing a feature to add notes or tweaks at an arbitrary moment within a music expression? music = \addAt (4 3/8) \global \once \override RehearsalMark.extra-offset #’(-1 . 0) we’re about a half-day’s work away from a hack that doesn’t

how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

Hello all, What would be involved in developing a feature to add notes or tweaks at an arbitrary moment within a music expression? e.g. global = \repeat unfold 100 s1 music = \addAt (4 3/8) \global \once \override RehearsalMark.extra-offset #’(-1 . 0) where (4 3/8) means “in the

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

On Jan 14, 2014, at 1:03 AM, Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote: Hello all, What would be involved in developing a feature to add notes or tweaks at an arbitrary moment within a music expression? e.g. global = \repeat unfold 100 s1 music = \addAt (4 3/8)

Re: how close are we to having an addAt or insertAt feature?

global = \repeat unfold 100 s1 music = \addAt (4 3/8) \global \once \override RehearsalMark.extra-offset #’(-1 . 0) where (4 3/8) means “in the fourth measure, at the moment of the 3rd eighth note” I suggest that such a command allows for a third, optional parameter, which makes