Hi all, I’m not sure whether I’m waiting for others to move this discussion forward…?
Assuming I’m not: 1. In *my* mind, the optimal situation *from the user/UI perspective* would be to have a single public interface \time BLAH FOO BAR etc. which would gracefully and transparently handle all possible time signature demands: simple and compound sigs, all possible “denominator” representations, beat structures, etc. My first question in this regard: Am I wrong [from the user/UI perspective]? I totally get that it may be unadvisable from the programmers’ perspective (and for sure from backwards-compatibility perspective, etc.) — my question here is more one of Lilypond programming philosophy. 2. Regardless of the more general philosophical state… What’s my next move on this patch? It sounded to my [dev-]noob ears like a number of people out there (Dan, Werner, etc.) had concerns about my idea to “bunt” by just adding a new denominator style to the TimeSignature grob. Do I wait for more input? Please let me know the protocol — I have lots of ideas I’d like to turn into patches, but I’m still at the bottom of the “process and culture” learning curve. Thanks, Kieren. > On Nov 8, 2021, at 8:26 PM, Kieren MacMillan <kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca> > wrote: > > Hi Dan, > >> The \compoundMeter command would like a word with you (and the >> \compound-meter markup command is standing behind it). > > Would *love* to have that discussion. Send them over to my place! > >> How far do you intend to push this style? Are you going to be content with >> a single denominator or allow stuff like >> >> 2 1 2+2+3 >> - + - for ----- >> q q. 8 > > Optimally, yes. But right now I’m trying to get a few singles in before > swinging for the fences… > > Cheers, > Kieren. ________________________________ Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his) ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info ‣ email: kie...@kierenmacmillan.info
