Re: Issue 2229 in lilypond: Patch: Broadcast articulations not in EventChord

[address@hidden]

On Jan 18, 2012, at 1:28 PM, address@hidden wrote:

> Updates:
>       Status: Started
> 
> Comment #6 on issue 2229 by address@hidden: Patch: Broadcast articulations 
> not in EventChord
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2229
> 
> Hi Mike,
> let me see whether I get this right.  The iterator is the entity converting a 
> music event into a stream event and broadcasting the latter.

Yup

> So the rhythmic-iterator would be responsible for "wild" rhythmic music 
> events (that currently can't occur since the parser wraps everything into 
> EventChord)

Yup

> and would dismantle their articulations, create a stream event from the music 
> event not containing articulations, and broadcast this stream event as well 
> as the stream events created from articulations.
> 

Yup

> When the EventChord iterator gets an EventChord music event, it would cater 
> for converting the contained rhythmic music events into stream events 
> containing articulation stream events, and broadcast those.  The rhythmic 
> event iterator would never get to see any of that.
> 

Yup

> So correct me if I am wrong: if we applied your patch to the current 
> LilyPond, the Rhythmic event iterator should not get to see any action except 
> possibly on synthesized music (where naked rhythmic event chords would have 
> their articulations work like chord articulations rather than chord 
> constituent articulations).

Yup

> 
> If (after changing the parser not to put EventChord on unnecessarily) we at 
> one time decided that c-. should not be equivalent to <c>-. but to <c-.>, 
> then we would just need to change the rhythmic music iterator.
> 

Yup

> If I got the details right, this sounds like it would indeed be a cleaner 
> solution.  Is there actually anything missing from your patch for doing the 
> whole job of this issue?
> 

Not that I know of (you'd have to use the most recent version of the patch - I 
just threw it up).

> The one thing I worry about is that some other iterator might have first 
> rights on the music events.  As you can easily guess, I have no clue in this 
> area.

Not for now.  If anyone ever changes this, several regtests will explode.

Cheers,
MS