On 26.09.2016 04:55, David Kastrup wrote:
Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes:
On 9/25/16, 2:46 PM, "Simon Albrecht" <simon.albre...@mail.de> wrote:
On 25.09.2016 22:06, Trevor Daniels wrote:
When needed, isn't this adequate?
\version "2.19.48"
triplet = \tuplet 3/2 \etc
\triplet { a'4 a' a' }
That¹s what I meant by ‘implementation is a no-brainer’ :-)
Best, Simon
I¹m generally opposed to syntactic sugar. It tends to hide behavior that
is important to know to move beyond the basics.
I also proposed the change because I think this is easy to grasp and
document: At the _end_ of the section on \tuplet, one can add a remark
that \tuplet 3/2 may be written as \triplet. So everybody will be well
aware that \triplet is \tuplet 3/2 and cannot be used for anything like 3/5.
\triplet saves very little input, it does not actually cover all
triplets (like the rare 3/5 triplets) and it does not generalize well to
things like quintuplets which can really be 5/4 or 5/3 depending on
metre.
It’s just that \tuplet 3/2 is the most common form by magnitudes. I
daresay 3/5 might be like 1000 times less common, but that may be due to
the repertoire I’m working on. At any rate I don’t think it’s going to
cause any confusion.
So I'm a bit meh on it even though I don't consider it GLISSful. Its
cost is small but I don't see it as overly helpful either. But then I
am writing on a US keyboard layout where 3/2 can be typed with 3 key
strokes and no modifiers (Shift, AltGr or whatever).
For me (German neo2 layout) it’s 6 key strokes (Mod4+. Mod3+i Mod4+,)
[1], but whether it’s 3, 4 or 6 key strokes doesn’t really matter so
much. Let me give an example: In my current project I have a section
where many bars look like this:
b \tuplet 3/2 { a'4 g8 }
And with many instances of \tuplet 3/2 it does reduce typing and visual
clutter to just have \triplet instead (which can also be autocompleted).
Now I might just write
triplet = \tuplet 3/2 \etc
in a library file of mine, but for once I like to keep such private
syntax at minimum level to simplify sharing code, and I thought that it
might help others as well.
Best, Simon
[1] That sounds terrible, but normally the layout is extremely handy
(well, for German text more so than for English…), especially for
Lilypond code, since all the \/{}[]<> and numbers are very easy to type.
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user