Re: Repeat alternative count

[Aaron Hill]

On 2020-08-29 9:02 am, Dan Eble wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2020, at 10:06, Kieren MacMillan
> <kieren_macmillan@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > > On Aug 29, 2020, at 10:00 AM, Aaron Hill <lilypond@hillvisions.com> 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > %%%%
> > > \repeat volta 5 {
> > > ...
> > > }
> > > \alternative 1,3 {
> > > ...
> > > }
> > > \alternative 2,4,5 {
> > > ...
> > > }
> > > %%%%
> >
> > That's pretty nice.
> >
> > K.
>
> Considering trying not to stray too far from the current syntax,
> what's your opinion of this?
>
>     \repeat volta 5 {
>       …
>     } \alternative {
>       \volta 1,3 { … }
>       \volta 2,4,5 { … }
>     }

Ah, of course.  I forget that \alternative only occurs once and has 
nested music inside it.  If it were called \alternatives (plural), I'd 
probably get it right for once.


> Would you mind being limited to all-or-none use of \volta within a
> given \alternative{}?

If the number list for the \volta command were optional, then perhaps 
{...} could be treated as \volta {...}.  In that way, existing usage 
maps to the new syntax without needing any conversion/translation.

Defining the semantics of an empty number list could be tricky, but the 
goal is to mimic existing behavior for compatibility.


> Even with \volta on all elements, would you want to be able to leave
> some volta numbers implied, or would you prefer to have LilyPond draw
> your attention to the omission?  Example:
>
>     \repeat volta 10 {
>       …
>     } \alternative {
>       \volta 1,3,9 { … } % 1, 3-4, 9-10
>       \volta 2,5 { … }   % 2, 5-8
>     }

That usage makes sense to me.  And I think implied occurrences would be 
desirable since a number list does not make it easy to specify ranges.


-- Aaron Hill