2007/9/26, Juergen Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I am just curious: Why not introducing a new class "Octaveless_pitch"
> or "Octave_Pitch" (i.e. pitch within an octave) that contains all of
> "Pitch" except for the octaves, and then making "Pitch" a subclass of
> "Octaveless_pitch" that just adds
On 9/26/07, Juergen Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>
> > 2007/9/25, Rune Zedeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> + int octave_;
> + int notename_;
> + Rational alteration_;
> >>>
> >>> Why don't you use a Pitch object for this combination?
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
2007/9/25, Rune Zedeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
+ int octave_;
+ int notename_;
+ Rational alteration_;
Why don't you use a Pitch object for this combination? You would get
Scale* for free.
Primarily because the two values octave_ and has_octave_
2007/9/25, Rune Zedeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> + int octave_;
> >> + int notename_;
> >> + Rational alteration_;
> >
> > Why don't you use a Pitch object for this combination? You would get
> > Scale* for free.
>
> Primarily because the two values octave_ and has_octave_ are very
> closely re
Thanks for comments.
Han-Wen Nienhuys skrev:
+ int octave_;
+ int notename_;
+ Rational alteration_;
Why don't you use a Pitch object for this combination? You would get
Scale* for free.
Primarily because the two values octave_ and has_octave_ are very
closely related.
They really /shoul
>- SCM key = scm_cons (scm_from_int (o), scm_from_int (n));
>+ Duration *dur = unsmob_duration (note->get_property ("duration"));
>+
>+ SCM smp = get_property ("measurePosition");
>+ Moment mp = robust_scm2moment (smp, Moment (0));
>+ /*
>+ TODO: Check this. Is this co
