Noeck <noeck.marb...@gmx.de> writes:
> Am 23.01.2013 15:51, schrieb David Kastrup:
>> But with some luck, starting with
>> 2.17.11, things might become more "natural" for you after
>> <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3095>.
>
> Am I right, that the fraction argument for \tuplet is inverse to the
> \times argument?
Yup.
> So, usual triplets are:
> \times 2/3 { a a a } or \tuplet 3/2 4 { a a a } ?
No need for the 4 here if you don't want automatic subgrouping (the
argument is an optional one). But yes.
> Isn't that likely to confuse users?
The documentation will stop talking about \times, apart from the music
function documentation (no, this patch does not do this yet, this is
followup work). Programmers looking at the Music data structures will
probably be put off by the meaning of the "numerator" and "denominator"
fields which still fit the usage of \times rather than of \tuplet.
At any rate, take a look at the third tuplet group in the picture for
<URL:http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/writing-rhythms#index-TupletNumber>
and the images for the subsequent section.
Do you really want to tell me that writing 2/3 for that output (which
makes enough sense to musicians to actually warrant that notation) is
non-confusing?
> Or is it only confusing long time users, while it is in general more
> intuitive? (3 notes instead of 2 -> 3/2)
I am not really sure that long-time users will be confused. They can
continue to use \times if they want to, but judging from my own
experience, I think they'll likely prefer \tuplet rather fast.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
