Hi Keith,
Would
\combineAt (measure moment/fraction) \base-music \new-music
be a more intuitive — and ultimately useful — syntax? You could also have a
\insertAt (measure moment/fraction) \base-music \new-music
which would insert something (instead of simultaneous-ing it).
The big downs
Hi Keith,
> I think the automatic-rest-length idea will be easier to use if it is
> independent of \pushToTag.
Yes, sorry, I misspoke: I didn’t mean to LITERALLY extend \pushToTag. I simply
meant that, to the user, it appears that \pushToTag puts music at a certain tag
point only, whereas your
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 17:31:24 -0800, Kieren MacMillan
wrote:
It could also be something like
\attachAt #’verse {
R1
c’4 d' e’ f’
... }
Then it would end up extending the current \pushToTag functionality
by filling with rests the duration from the preceding musical moment/expressi
Hi Keith,
> It would extend the following rest,or skip, so that the rest ends when
> \tag#'verse happens in the conductor part. Maybe \extendUntil#'verse would
> be more explicit, but syntax can follow function.
It could also be something like
\attachAt #’verse {
R1
c’4 d' e’ f’
On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:51:03 -0800, Kieren MacMillan
wrote:
1. Can this be “prefix” rather than “postfix”? e.g.,
2. Could we use \alignTo instead of overloading \tag? e.g.
\alignTo #’verse R1 ...
Yes, that would actually be easier to interpret.
It would extend the following rest,or skip,
Hi Keith,
> The \pushToTag function does not insert skips of the correct length.
> It inserts existing pieces of music into other music without adjusting
> lengths, nor computing any lengths.
Correct.
> It would be helpful for LilyPond to compute rest-lengths for us.
That *would* be great!
> I
2013/12/30 Keith OHara :
> It would be helpful for LilyPond to compute rest-lengths for us.
> I am playing around with the idea of eventually making R1\until#'coda
> repeat itself until LilyPond sees 'coda somewhere in the score.
>
> Here is a toy version, using the existing input R1\tag#'coda
> It
Kieren MacMillan sympatico.ca> writes:
> > If you insert a bar, you'd have to change R1*32 to R1*33 by hand. Or,
if you
> > change the 10th out of the 32 bars into a 3/4 measure, I believe you
would
> > then have to change R1*32 to "R1*9 R2. R1*22" -- highly error prone.
>
> \pushToTag was des
Hi David,
>> Now all one needs is a function to take skips (e.g., from a global
>> variable) and turn them into multi-measure-rests — which is probably
>> relatively easy to do — and there's no more problem. =)
>
> You mean like
> \applyMusic \mmrest-of-length { s1*20 }
No… I mean like
\so
On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 22:56:49 -0800, Kieren MacMillan
wrote:
Instead of specifying an offset from a rehearsal mark, maybe simpler to
have an independent type of marker to put in the \global stream. Then
the entries of the parts are visible all at once in \global
global = { R1*32 \mark"A" R1*30
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi James (et al.),
>
>> If you insert a bar, you'd have to change R1*32 to R1*33 by hand. Or, if you
>> change the 10th out of the 32 bars into a 3/4 measure, I believe you would
>> then have to change R1*32 to "R1*9 R2. R1*22" -- highly error prone.
>
> \pushToTag was
Hi Keith (et al.),
> Instead of specifying an offset from a rehearsal mark, maybe simpler to
> have an independent type of marker to put in the \global stream. Then
> the entries of the parts are visible all at once in \global
> global = { R1*32 \mark"A" R1*30 \marker"vln34" R1*18 \mark"B" }
In
James Harkins gmail.com> writes:
> Keith OHara oco.net> writes:
>
> > If we had an easy way to enter a duration of until-X, then ability to
> > place the next note X comes naturally. Sometimes 'X' is the end of
> > the entire piece. Would that ease the difficulties mentioned above ?
>
> It m
Hi James (et al.),
> If you insert a bar, you'd have to change R1*32 to R1*33 by hand. Or, if you
> change the 10th out of the 32 bars into a 3/4 measure, I believe you would
> then have to change R1*32 to "R1*9 R2. R1*22" -- highly error prone.
\pushToTag was designed (by David K, and paid for i
On Dec 2, 2013 9:40 PM, "James Harkins" wrote:
>
> Keith OHara oco.net> writes:
>
> > Of course specifying time in terms of durations is more convenient
> > than specifying absolute time, or we would need to change every
> > following note when we insert a few measures.
>
> Assuming that "duratio
Keith OHara oco.net> writes:
> Of course specifying time in terms of durations is more convenient
> than specifying absolute time, or we would need to change every
> following note when we insert a few measures.
Assuming that "durations" and "absolute time" are the only two options. I'm
not mak
James Harkins gmail.com> writes:
> Time is represented exclusively in terms of Inter-Onset Intervals
> [i.e. durations]. This is great for streams of events, but perfectly
> wretched for multiple streams that must coordinate.
>
> Example: Suppose I'm writing an orchestral piece with, oh, 40 stave
Am 2013-12-02 um 20:56 schrieb James Harkins :
> Now let's say that we don't live in a perfect world and I didn't write
> everything in perfect form on paper before engraving. Then I decide that one
> 2/4 bar should actually be 3/4. So now I have to change s2 to s2. in the
> global variable AN
Picking up on a comment of Kieren's, which I think doesn't need to hijack
David's financial support thread...
I find LilyPond's model of time to be the most inconvenient aspect of the
input format -- so inconvenient that it alone may be enough to drive people
away.
Time is represented exclusively
19 matches
Mail list logo
