Re: Looking for proper beam grouping

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 2/24/09 2:46 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:

> 
> 
> Carl, you wrote Tuesday, February 24, 2009 1:43 AM
> 
>> On 2/23/09 12:52 PM, "Maarten Deen" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>>> I have a piece of music in 3/4 which has bars like { d4. c8 b8.
>>> a16 }
>>> Lilypond groups the last three notes together, making it look
>>> like a 6/8
>>> measure, but I want the c8 to be separate and only the b8. a16 to
>>> be grouped
>>> (like a proper 3/4 would look like).
>>> 
>>> I've tried some settings, like #(override-auto-beam-setting '(end
>>> * * * *) 1
>>> 4)
>>> or \set beatGrouping = #'(4 4 4) but to no avail.
>> 
>> The proper way to set beatGrouping is #'(1 1 1), which means group
>> 1 beat, 1
>> beat 1 beat, where a beat is defined by the time signature as a
>> 1/4 note.
>> 
>> But this doesn't work properly, and it should.
>> 
>> I think this is a bug in the autobeaming code.  Could you please
>> send a bug
>> report to bug-lilypond?
> 
> This is not a bug.  There is still a general auto-beam
> setting for 3/4 time which inhibits beatGrouping.
> 
> beatBrouping should work with the override
> 
> #(revert-auto-beam-setting '(end * * 3 4) 3 4)
> 

I guess I consider it a bug when the default auto-beam setting prevents
proper beaming.  It may be a bug that's already fixed, but it's still a bug.

> 
> I was waiting for 2.13 before I completed this work, as
> changing the default beaming did not seem right during
> a stable release.

I think it is right to apply it during a stable release, because it fixes a
bug -- improper beaming.  The criterion we identified for disallowed changes
during a stable release is syntax changes that break previously-working
files.  And this doesn't fall into that category, so I think it should be
applied to 2.12.

Thanks,

Carl