Re: Add modal transformations provided by Mike Ellis (issue4079064)

[percival . music . ca]

LGTM.


http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely
File Documentation/notation/pitches.itely (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode827
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:827: it may be converted to its
@notation{retrograde} (written backwards).
I'm not certain you need to spell out "written backwards".  You haven't
said what "inverted" or "transposed" means, after all!

If you're paranoid, then how about adding a stub to the music glossary,
and a @rgloss{} to the @seealso ?  (or actually add a full entry to the
glossary if you want)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/diff/1/Documentation/notation/pitches.itely#newcode855
Documentation/notation/pitches.itely:855: \new Staff {
I know that you don't want to hear this at this point, but...

You know, all these examples are beautifully written and are very clear.
 I think we could have capitalized on this by doing everything at once.

@lilypond
motif = ...
diatonicScale = ...
pentatonicscale = ...
chromaticscale = ...

\relative c' {
  \motif
  \modalTranspose \motif
  \modalInvert \motif
  \modalRetrograde \motif
@end lilypond

this isn't really a serious suggestion, and in any case, I'd need to
look at the output of a .ly example before being able to have a serious
opinion on whether this would actually help or not.  (the all-in-one
example might be too long or confusing or something)

I'm mainly just mentioning this so that people have it in the backs of
their minds when writing future doc stuff.


(BTW, do you actually need the \score and \new Staff in these?  My first
guess would be that a simple \relative c' would suffice, but maybe I'm
wrong or maybe the transposing complicates the \relative)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4079064/