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 than (1 -1).
In that case, it would appear that "alteration" as a separate concept could be eliminated, and instead of pitch x with alteration (y z ...), we could just write (x y z ...). It is just a pity that x is not (logarithmically) equispaced in physical pitch. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
