"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <m...@mikesolomon.org> > To: <lilypond-u...@gnu.org>; <lilypond-devel@gnu.org> > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 8:03 AM > Subject: For those who need new features and bug fixes... > > >> Hey all, >> >> I have two 16ish-hour flights this holiday season and I'll be >> filling them with composition, Sudoku, and LilyPond programming. >> So, this is the time to send me: >> >> 1) Features you need implemented. >> 2) Bugs you need fixed. >> 3) Things you need reviewed. >> >> I'll get as many of them done as I can on the flight. >> >> Cheers, >> MS > > I don't know how feasible it is, but > > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=34
I'd recommend against it. The main problem is that moments are interchangeably used as time spans and time moments and the arithmetic properties with regard to grace timing are a foul compromise of those semantics. Doing this properly would, in my opinion, replace all uses of moments as time spans with straightforward rationals. I've started on this thing several times with the idea of getting it under control by working on the features of moment arithmetic alone, but it is a losing battle due to this kind of inconsistency. Any solution concocted in 12 hours will be of the kind opening man-months of subsequent semantics-tweaking. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
