Re: Transpose Command

[Anthony W. Youngman]

In message 
<address@hidden>, Francisco 
Vila <address@hidden> writes
> I don't know how it works, but can imagine that the transpose function
> should be *much* more clever than it currently is, to realize itself
> it is inside a relative block. So it leaves the user with the task of
> doing it manually whenever needed.

Actually, as I understand it (I may be wrong) it CAN'T be cleverer. The 
problem is the confusion between note NAMES and note PITCHES.

When a text file is parsed by lilypond, it dumps a stream of note NAMES 
into lilypond. "relative" reads that list of NAMES and converts it into 
PITCHES. "transpose" on the other hand needs to work on PITCHES so if it 
is fed a stream of NAMES, it converts them to pitches (thinking in 
absolute mode) itself.

That's why sticking a transpose inside a relative messes up - by the 
time the note gets to "relative" it's already been converted to a pitch 
by "transpose", so "relative" doesn't have a name to work with. So 
relative just feeds the pitch straight through - unaltered.

Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - address@hidden