Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - was [talk] easy tuplets

[David Kastrup]

Ian Hulin <address@hidden> writes:

> On 05/10/12 08:47, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Ian Hulin <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> 1. Should the new \tuplet retain the \times meaning of the fraction,
>>> i.e. \tuplet 2/3 {c8 c c} uses 2/3 because that's what you'd use if you
>>> were just using durations: c8*2/3 c c , or
>>> invert it as \tuplet 3/2 {c8 c c} because that reflects better the
>>> "three notes in the time of two" definition of a triplet.
>> 
>> Well, I definitely remember enough of my learning curve with LilyPond to
>> recommend taking the opportunity of renaming for reversing the fraction,
>> making it correspond with the output from
>> 
>>     \override TupletNumber #'text = #tuplet-number::calc-fraction-text
>
> I'll take that as a 1+ for \tuplet 3/2 { blah...} representing a
> triplet/Triole.
>
>> 
>> I don't think we need a wealth of shorthands, though: we can instead
>> just take the tuplet number as a shorthand as 3 is perfectly
>> distinguishable from 3/1 as LilyPond input.
>> 
>> So \tuplet 3 can be the same as \tuplet 3/2, and \tuplet 2 the same as
>> \tuplet 2/3, and \tuplet 5 as tuplet 5/4 and \tuplet 6 as \tuplet 6/4.
>> 
>> I am not sure whether other tuplet numbers are unambiguous enough to
>> warrant a shorthand.
>> 
> Hmmm... interesting, but I'd still like like \tuplet to be able to
> handle anything \times does.

Why wouldn't it be able to handle anything \times does?  Feed it the
fraction for \times-like behavior, feed it an integer as a shorthand for
common tuplet types.

-- 
David Kastrup