Re: extended auto beaming

[Erik Sandberg]

On Thursday 29 July 2004 16.23, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > I have been doing some thinking about how to make autobeaming
> > user-friendly.  My conclusion is that the easiest way might be to
> > show by example how to autobeam. I.e., autobeaming would take a
> > beamed \notes block as a parameter, something like
> >
> > \useAutoBeaming \notes {c8[ c c] c[ c c] c[ c] c[ c]}
> >
> > for your example. Of course something more sophisticated is needed
> > (such as different beamings for different durations), you would
> > perhaps still need to pass parameters such as duration and key
> > signature.

I have been thinking soem more about it. I think it would be sensible to just 
let lily interpret the music block internally, and for any sequence of notes 
that matches a beamed group in the \notes block, copy exactly the beaming 
properties of those notes (i.e. all stem*BeamCount settings as well).

I have no idea about whether or not the lilypond engine in its current state 
is flexible enough to do this cleanly, though.. 

> I like it!
>
> What about allowing nested `[' for your \useAutoBeaming?
>
>   \useAutoBeaming \notes
>     {c8[ c16[ c] c[ c]] c[ c16[ c] c[ c]] c[ c] c[ c]}
>
> This covers all situations I can currently think of.
>
> Maybe this syntax extension is useful for normal lilypond input
> also...

I don't understand fully what this would mean. Is the nested brackets for 
controlling stem*BeamCount?

I think that the notation is a bit messy, considering that
c[ c[ c] c]
could be interpreted either as
c[ c c] c
c  c[ c c]
or as
c[ c c c]
c c[ c] c


Also, how would things like this be notated?

---------------
---------------
------- -------
--- --- --- ---
| | | | | | | |
o o o o o o o o

Erik