Re: [proposal] easy triplets and tuplets - Draft 3

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 10/07/2012 11:52 PM, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
> There is, however, no check whether the fraction with the durations makes
> sense and matches the real tuplet (in most cases, itwill not).

Yes, that's what I mean.  I'd like to see something where the fractions and 
durations are all derived from the tuplet syntax.

> I don't think that fully automatic tuplet notation will work in all cases.
> However, there is certainly enough to think about a more general tuplet command
> in lilypond. The formatting functions are already there, what's missing is the
> input syntax.

Well, just as a very provisional sort of example, I was thinking along these 
sort of lines:

    \tuplet 7 { .... }          gives you 7 in the time of 4, and prints just
                                a 7 in the tuplet bracket.

    \tuplet 7/4 { .... }        gives you regular 7:4 ratio, and by default
                                prints the ratio in the tuplet bracket.

    \tuplet { 8*7 }/4 { .... }  gives you 7 8th-notes in the time of 4, and
                                would print in the tuplet bracket: 7 {8} : 4
                                (replacing {8} by an actual 8th note).

    \tuplet 7/{ 8*4 } { .... }  ditto, but you get the note-value printed the
                                other side of the ratio:  7 : 4 {8}

    \tuplet {16*7}/{4} { ... }  gives you 7 16th-notes in the space of a
                                quarter-note, and would print:   7 {16} : {4}

    \tuplet {16*7}/{4.} { .. }  gives you 7 16th-notes in the space of a dotted
                                quarter (really, a 7:6 ratio), and would print:
                                7 {16} : {4.}

    \tuplet {16*7}/{8*3} {...}  gives you 7 16th-notes in the space of 3 8th-
                                notes (really, the same as the above), and would
                                print:  7 {16} : 3 {8}

Note that at least some of the above examples, by specifying note durations as 
well as ratios, could in principle be checkable for correctness.

Then you could have something like \tupletWithDuration to indicate printing the 
overall duration above the tuplet value, à la Ferneyhough.

It might also be useful to have something which allows you to specify the 
note-values (so enabling checking) _without_ having them appear in the tuplet 
bracket.  e.g. something like (this is probably stupid, but I hope someone can 
come up with a better idea):  \tuplet {16!*7} / 4 would print the 16th-note, 
\tuplet {16*7} {4} wouldn't; and similarly \tuplet {16!*7}/{4!}  would see the 
tuplet bracket containing 7 {16} : {4}, while \tuplet {16*7}/{4!} would see it 
contain 7 : {4}.

I don't know if any of the above syntax is feasible as-is (I think my idea 
involving ! is probably really stupid, I hope the other bits are vaguely sane), 
but I hope it's at least useful in pointing to the sort of thing that could be done.

> It's not purely manual overrides... (But still enough rope to hang yourself in
> the way you describe).

For what it's worth, I did appreciate that it wasn't all manual -- it was the 
rope I was worrying about, though :-)