Ian Hulin <[email protected]> writes: > On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote: >> Ian Hulin <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction, >>> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you >>> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or >>> invert it as \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c c} because that reflects better the >>> "three notes in the time of two" definition of a triplet. >> >> Well, I definitely remember enough of my learning curve with LilyPond to >> recommend taking the opportunity of renaming for reversing the fraction, >> making it correspond with the output from >> >> \override TupletNumber #'text = #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text > > I'll take that as a 1+ for \tuplet 3/2 { blah...} representing a > triplet/Triole. > >> >> I don't think we need a wealth of shorthands, though: we can instead >> just take the tuplet number as a shorthand as 3 is perfectly >> distinguishable from 3/1 as LilyPond input. >> >> So \tuplet 3 can be the same as \tuplet 3/2, and \tuplet 2 the same as >> \tuplet 2/3, and \tuplet 5 as tuplet 5/4 and \tuplet 6 as \tuplet 6/4. >> >> I am not sure whether other tuplet numbers are unambiguous enough to >> warrant a shorthand. >> > Hmmm... interesting, but I'd still like like \tuplet to be able to > handle anything \times does.
Why wouldn't it be able to handle anything \times does? Feed it the fraction for \times-like behavior, feed it an integer as a shorthand for common tuplet types. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
