Re: [talk] easy tuplets

[Janek Warchoł]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:27 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Interesting.  Apart from which one would produce tuplet brackets,
>> maybe *x/y notation would allow us to distinguish between
>>
>>   \times 2/3 { b16 b b }
>>   \times 2/3 { b16 b b }
>>
>> and
>>
>>   \times 4/6 { b16 b b b b b }
>>
>> by writing { b16*2/3 b b b b b } and { b16*4/6 b b b b b },
>> respectively?
>
> No, it happens that the scale factor of durations is indeed a scalar
> rational rather than an integer pair, so the latter two are
> indistinguishable.

would it be feasible to remake it into an integer pair, so that these
two could be distinguished?

>> b12 is still more brief, though.
>>
>> As for \times 2/3 {c8. c16}, {c12. c24} seems clear enough from my
>> perspective.  No idea whether "computers will like it", though :)
>
> I don't like it since it does not match musical concepts.  You would not
> talk about "12th notes" to other musicians.

Only because we're not used to this convention - who knows what will
happen when LilyPond will rule the world of music engraving?  Maybe
everyone will talk about 12th notes then?
Seriously though, i think this syntax would be very useful for
algorithmic composers and computer programs manipulating Lily code.
Another advantage is code readability and ease of copying it (shall i
elaborate?)

Besides, it's not like we would loose any functionality: \times would
still be there.

cheers,
Janek