Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 3:23 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: >>> Sorry, i don't understand. You mean that you know how to do this, but >>> there's something else blocking you from implementing it? >> >> If two different things are indistinguishable, you can't have them both. >> >> If (3+2)/8 is shorthand for #(3 2 8), then (2+2)/2 is shorthand for >> #'(2 2 2) and >> \time #'(2 2 2) 6/4 >> already _has_ an assigned meaning. > > Ah, your previous message makes perfect sense now. I didn't know that > \time #'(2 2 2) 6/4 is possible at all! It seems to be undocumented - > i've only found it used in two snippets. > > Frankly, \time #'(2 2 2) 6/4 is a nice thing, but the grouping can be > done using beatStructure. I wouldn't oppose deprecating current > behaviour in favour of more user-friendly compound meter syntax. > >>> Anyway, from my point of view (user-friendliness obsession) this would >>> be fantastic! I'm ready to pay 25 euro for being able to use \time >>> (3+2)/8 (without any additional hashes, quotes etc) as a legitimate, >>> fully-supported meter command. >> >> It would have been 3+2/8 at any rate since throwing parens into the >> token syntax would have further messed up the ambiguities, and forms >> like 3/2+2/5 would not likely have worked. > > You mean, it would be impossible to support 3/2+2/5 as #((3 2) (2 5))? > Pity.
It would mean that 3/2+2/5 would mean #((3 2) (2 5)) basically wherever you chose to write it. Since we don't have a use for it anywhere except after \time (and it is actually a rather uncommon use of time), it seems like overkill. One could try to devise a scheme where, say 2+3/4 -> #(2 3 . 4) (meter) 2+3+2 -> #(2 3 2) (beat pattern) 2/2+3/4 -> #((2 . 2) (3 . 4)) (meter) and then figure out predicates that can reliably tell a meter from a beat pattern. But it would not really extend to "irrational meters", I think. And I am not sure that this kind of complexity for interpreting strings of the kind [0-9+/]+ is really helpful. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
