Re: beam breaking in tuplets

[Mats Bengtsson]

Victor Eijkhout wrote:
>  Beam breaking is a visual operation, not a mathematical one. I want a 
> sixteenth beam broken at any beat boundary, no matter whether this is 
> in 4/4 time or in a 27 over 26 fragment.
I don't agree completely. Beam breaking is used to clarify the rhythmic 
structure,
so you have to tell LilyPond where the beats are.
> Btw, that raises another question I''ve been meaning to ask: do 
> assignments have scope? Can I limit this beam setting overriding to 
> one fragment, without explicitly restoring the old rules? (Lilypond 
> looks so much like TeX that I would really expect such a mechanism to 
> exist.)
If you do a \set ... or \override ..., the setting will be active within 
the current
context (unless you explicitly specify \set Score. ... or whatever other 
level in
the context hierarchy) from the current moment until the context dies 
(or you
change the setting). Even though the #(override-auto-beam-setting) is a 
function
that is slightly more advanced than an ordinary \set or \override, the 
scoping
principle is the same.

So, if you want a limited scope, you can explicitly create a short-lived 
context.
Here's an example that uses smaller note heads for one measure:

\relative c'{ c d e f \new Voice {\tiny g f e d } c d e d c1 }

  /Mats