Re: Auto-panner

[Vaughan McAlley]

On 28 January 2014 07:07, Jan-Peter Voigt <address@hidden> wrote:

On 27.01.2014 20:51, David Kastrup wrote:
>> What about a closure?
> Won't be able to distinguish being called another time from the same
> output (\layout, \midi, \musicxml (this one's hypothetical yet),
> \addQuote...) or the next one.

of course not ... I see Vaughans idea as a first draft ... and now he's
able to use it in a global variable.

Thanks Jan-Peter& David. Yes, what I submitted above was very much a draft, as I had got as far as I could by myself. I suspected I would learn more than just how to put it in \global, for example:

> Why define-scheme-function when returning music?

> Perhaps this function had another meaning in the first place?

Yes, that. Plus me being a complete Guile-noob :-)

I’m getting a much better idea of how Lilypond code interacts with Scheme now. So even though music is a Scheme value, define-music-function is optimized for returning music and would work better in corner cases?

> But for a more robust implementation, there need to be score-level context-properties - perhaps an engraver. We'll see later ;)

90% of the music I work with is one staff to a part, eg renaissance choir music or chamber music, so personally I don’t need much robustness. For listening to renaissance music I set all voices to clarinet (artificial, not sampled) with the panning spread. It lets me hear all the parts and identify which part a problem might be in.

Thanks again,

Vaughan