Re: Extending the width of a glissando

[David Kastrup]

Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:

> Le 20/09/2021 à 23:55, David Kastrup a écrit :
>> Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
>>
>>> Le 20/09/2021 à 23:31, David Kastrup a écrit :
>>>> Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts? One would have to look at the most typical use cases
>>>>> to decide on an interface.
>>>> Anything wrong with using a ly:transform? type?  It's straightforward to
>>>> create and manipulate.
>>> I had already forgotten about those. Given sufficient
>>> documentation, it would probably work well.
>> I find in the IR:
>>
>>   -- Function: ly:make-transform xx yx xy yy x0 y0
>>       Create a transform.  Without options, it is an identity transform.
>>       Given four arguments XX, YX, XY, and YY, it is a linear transform,
>>       given six arguments (with X0 and Y0 last), it is an affine
>>       transform.  Transforms can be called as functions on other
>>       transforms (concatening them) or on points given either as complex
>>       number or real number pair.  See also ‘ly:make-rotation’,
>>       ‘ly:make-scaling’, and ‘ly:make-translation’.
>>
>> -- Function: ly:transform? x
>>       Is X a ‘Transform’ object?
>>
>>   -- Function: ly:transform->list transform
>>       Convert a transform matrix to a list of six values.  Values are XX,
>>       YX, XY, YY, X0, Y0.
>>
>>   -- Function: ly:make-translation x y
>>       Make a transform translating by X and Y.  If only X is given, it
>>       can also be a complex number or a pair of numbers indicating the
>>       offset to use.
>>
>>   -- Function: ly:make-rotation angle center
>>       Make a transform rotating by ANGLE in degrees.  If CENTER is given
>>       as a pair of coordinates, it is the center of the rotation,
>>       otherwise the rotation is around (0 .  0).
>>
>>   -- Function: ly:make-scaling scale scaley
>>       Create a scaling transform from argument SCALE and optionally
>>       SCALEY.  When both arguments are given, they must be real and give
>>       the scale in X and Y direction.  If only SCALE is given, it may
>>       also be complex to indicate a scaled rotation in the manner of
>>       complex number rotations, or a pair of reals for specifying
>>       different scales in X and Y direction like with the first calling
>>       convention.
>
>
> Sure, I didn't mean that transforms weren't well-documented.
> I just suggest a paragraph of NR documentation, possibly linking
> back to the IR, simply because the kind of technical language
> we use in IR isn't obvious to understand for most users I would
> guess (linear transform? complex number? number pair? etc.).

But that's a programming tool.  There is not much of a point in the NR.
And even the level of the EG does not seem to make it much of a good fit
there.

-- 
David Kastrup