Hi Kim, thank you for the suggestion.
4. August 2019 16:14, "hs kim" <khs0em...@gmail.com> schrieb: > Hi. > I was making "la campanella". There was many subdivide beams but it was so > confused that I can't make it anymore. That's why I decided to change the > way subdivide beams are written. > > In the stable branch, subdivide beams are too complicated to know. But my > idea is (subdividing of four 32 note and four 16 note with 1/8) > > \set subdividieBeams = #"8" > a32[[ b c b] f16[ g a g]] As I understand it this is a suggestion for an input syntax for manual beam subdivisions. As such it would not be an approach to handle the beam subdivision problems on a fundamental level (https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5547/), but I think it would indeed be a good idea to have such a manual syntax - just as manual beaming is often necessary over automatic beaming. However, the proposed syntax has two issues as far as I can tell: * It changes the meaning of the single bracket, a well-established syntax, requiring really involved modifications for existing scores * It would be somewhat inconsistent - as single brackets would mean something different in different contexts. * I'm not sure about the issues for the actual parser. Instead I would suggest to keep the meaning of the single [ ] as it is (=> manually beam the given group of notes), and add a new syntactic element for "beam subdivision" instead. A few suggestions (note that the following characters are already in use and should not be repurposed: . | - [ ] { } ( ) = a32[ b c b ; f16 g a g] a32[ b c b / f16 g a g] a32[ b c b "]" f16 g a g] a32[ b c b T f16 g a g] To be clear: What this thread can achieve is a discussion about an *intent* for some new development. There would still have to be someone to actually take a look at it and implement it. And I think it's not totally trivial. Urs _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
