Re: Changing autobeaming for 4/4 time

[Patrick McCarty]

On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 11:38:22PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> 
> Carl Sorensen wrote Sunday, August 09, 2009 10:59 PM
> 
> >Could the two of you please take some of these examples and beam
> >them
> >manually so that I can see what they *should* do?  I'll then try
> >to figure
> >out why the autobeam engraver doesn't do it.
> >
> >Some explanation as to *why* it should work the way it should
> >would also be
> >helpful.

I just did a fresh install from current git, and apparently my patch
is not needed after all.  Something must have went wrong with my
previous install.

Trevor, I am seeing different beaming patterns than you are.  I'll
note these cases below.

> \relative c'' {
>  a8 a a a a a a a |  % OK
> 
>  a16 a a8 a a
>  a a16 a a8 a |  % wrong, should be ...
>  a16[ a a8] a a
>  a[ a16 a] a8 a |

The two measures above have the same beaming.

>  a8 a a16 a a8
>  a a a a16 a | % wrong, should be ...
>  a8 a a16[ a a8]
>  a a a[ a16 a] |
> 
>  a8 a16 a a8 a16 a
>  a8 a16 a a8 a16 a | % wrong, should be ...
>  a8[ a16 a] a8 a16 a
>  a8[ a16 a] a8 a16 a |

Same with these two measures (above).

>  a32 a a16 a a a a32 a a16 a
>  a a a32 a a16 a a a a32 a | % wrong, should be ...
>  a32[ a a16 a a] a[ a32 a a16 a]
>  a[ a a32 a a16] a a a a32 a
> }

I wonder why we are seeing different beaming patterns?  I think all of
your manually-beamed patterns are correct though.


Thanks,
Patrick