Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes:
> On 12/18/09 9:52 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Carl, you wrote Friday, December 18, 2009 4:21 PM
>>
>>> On 12/18/09 2:49 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> A question. Does your code require autobeaming
>>>> rules to be defined for beams of every possible
>>>> duration? I ask because the following example beams
>>>> inconsistently, and I'm not sure if this is due to your
>>>> code or differences in the autobeaming rules for 4/4 and
>>>> 2/2 time signatures. With a32 instead of a64 a64 the
>>>> beaming is fine.
>>>
>>> The current design is that unless a beaming rule is specified for
>>> a given
>>> duration, the default beaming rule is used.
>>
>> I mentioned this example because the beaming with
>> your patch is inconsistent when the 64th notes are
>> present because they cause the rule for 32nd notes
>> to be ignored. This is a change from the previous
>> behaviour.
>
> Actually, the code now correctly breaks the beam in response to the
> rule for the shortest note in the beam, rather than for the *last*
> note in the beam.
If I understood your explanation correctly, your code would not break
{
\time 2/2
\repeat unfold 16 c'64 \repeat unfold 16 c'32
\repeat unfold 16 c'64
}
symmetrically with the current patterns since it would connect the first
two quarters and keep the last two quarters unconnected.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
