Re: auto-beaming

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 3/19/09 8:34 AM, "Mats Bengtsson" <address@hidden> wrote:
> Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>> 
>> On 3/19/09 5:13 AM, "Mats Bengtsson" <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>> Should we turn this into feature request to make the automatic
>>> subdivision of beams even more flexible, with separate rules for
>>> different note lengths, or would the resulting scheme get too messy to
>>> use and implement?
>>> 
>>>    
>> 
>> It seems to me that this should be a feature request.
>> 
>> It also seems to me that we could make this quite easy to use as a default.
>> 
>> We currently have beatGrouping used to end beams and beatLength used to
>> subdivide beams.
>> 
>> If we want more control over ending beams, we use override-auto-beam-setting
>> to add beam endings for specific beam types (16th, 32ned, etc.)
>> 
>> We should be able to add a functionality for  override-beam-subdivision that
>> is beam type specific, just like we've done for beam endings.  Although it
>> may be somewhat hard to get just right, the documentation is in *much*
>> better shape than it used to be (thanks, Trevor), and we can use a
>> corresponding syntax so it must only be learned once.
> You mean, using
> #(override-auto-beam-setting '(subdivide 1 32 3 4) 1 8)
> to get a subdivision after the first four 32nd notes in 3/4 meter? Good
> idea!

Actually, that's not what I meant.  But it's what I should have meant.  So I
guess I should have meant that.  I'm glad people smarter than me are around
to pick up the pieces!

Carl