On 18/08/15 14:56, David Kastrup wrote: > Malte Meyn <lilyp...@maltemeyn.de> writes: > >> > Am 18.08.2015 um 09:01 schrieb Blöchl Bernhard: >>> >> Thanks for clarifying my confusion. As long as I used lilypond I always >>> >> used \tuplet and argue that I did not even know that \times was/is a >>> >> possible alternative. >>> >> >>> >> \time and \times are very close and so - I think - dangerous and >>> >> error-prone. >> > >> > I think the \times command should be removed completely from lilypond >> > as soon as possible (2.19.xx/2.20.0) for the following reasons: >> > (1) The two commands \times and \tuplet do the same with different >> > syntax => confusion (especially for new users who copy old code which >> > works in new versions without using convert-ly but doesn’t use the >> > \tuplet function mentioned in the LM and NR). >> > (2) \tuplet has a feature that \times doesn’t have (easily setting >> > tupletSpannerDuration) but not the other way round, so using \times >> > has no advantage => \times won’t be missed. >> > (3) As Berndhard said ‘time’ and ‘times’ are indeed very similar words >> > and ‘tuplet’ describes the functionality better.
> That's putting-cart-before-horse territory. And as an English-speaker, I'd also disagree. (1) I'm an *old* user who would get thoroughly confused. I've used lily since about 2.4, and never used tuplet. (2) Thanks for pointing this out though, I could have done with it before and will probably use it :-) (3) Did I say I was an ENGLISH speaker? Looking it up in online dictionaries, it seems your usage is typical AMERICAN, but to me, "tuplet" is the *opposite* of triplet, complementary and mutually exclusive. A tuplet is "two notes played in the time of three" (What American usage calls a duplet, a word I can't ever remember meeting). Cheers, Wol _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
