Re: Constructive Criticism and a Question

[stk]

> . . . either you still need to have \set tupletSpannerDuration
> or you need to build the tuplet duration into the tuplet function
> itself, e.g. \tuplet 3:2 2. {c c8 c c4} for John's first example,
> and \tuplet 3:2 4. {c4 c8 c c4} for the second. . .

Yes.  Up until this point, the argument has been to replace \times
with \tuplet for no functional reason whatsoever:  the two are
functionally absolutely identical.  But being able to specify the tuplet
duration as a second argument would provide a functional reason for
creating a \tuplet keyword, and the addition of the tuplet-duration would
be extremely simple and enormously helpful for specifying exactly what
the user intended.

Since the duration would be the second of three arguments, it could not be
optional, but that's not a problem.

I think (?) this would have the side effect that \tuplet 3:2 2. would
be the same as \tuplet 6:4 2. or \tuplet 9:6 2., which would mean
that it would always be OK (even if not required) to express the ratio
in reduced form (3:2 here).

-- Tom

-----------------------------------------------------------

John Mandereau wrote:
> Frédéric Chiasson wrote:
>
>> But to avoid repeating \tuplet functions for long passages with the
>> same tuplets, we could admit that kind of syntax :
>>
>> \tuplet 3:2 {c8 d e f g a b c d e d c b a g f e d}
>>
>> without having one long bracket going through all the notes. But I
>> understand that you don't want to change that for programming issues.
>>
>
> It is not possible to determine whether "long" tuplets should be
> splitted or not; how then would you determine whether
>
> \tuplet 3:2 {c4 c8 c c4}
>
> should be printed as
>
> |----- 3 ----|
>       __
>  |   |  |   |
>  |   |  |   |
> X   X  X   X
>
> or as
>
> |- 3 -| |- 3 -|
>
>  |   |\  |\  |
>  |   |   |   |
> X   X   X   X
>
> ?
>
> In your example,
>
> \set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)
>
> can already save from typing \tuplet (\times today) a lot of times.
>
> Cheers,
>
Yes, I was wondering about this too. It seems to me that either you
still need to have \set tupletSpannerDuration or you need to build the
tuplet duration into the tuplet function itself, e.g. \tuplet 3:2 2. {c
c8 c c4} for John's first example, and \tuplet 3:2 4. {c4 c8 c c4} for
the second. But then this is probably making \tuplet a little more
complicated than people would like. (unless maybe the duration value is
optional and can be omitted?)

Just a thought.

Brett