Re: Aleatoric / modern notation

[SoundsFromSound]

I'm trying to wrap my head around the frameEngraver4 and can't quite grasp
the syntax and how to customize the code to suit my needs.  

Is there a guide or cheat-sheet that explains how to use frameEngraver to
it's fullest potential?  I feel like it's a bit over my head and I feel lost
when trying to make sense of it.  

Thanks for any feedback.

Ben


Whoa --

It's marvelous to see such a detailed response to my question.

Most importantly, frameEngraver4 works! I will study the differences
between 3 and 4 to see what changed.

As mentioned, it seems to me that the best course of action would be to
make dynamic spanner creation a high development priority and an expected
user interaction: Custom notational constructs like these have been around
for half a century or so, and it would be especially welcoming to
contemporary composers if the system were to facilitate them with some kind
of interface.

If this can't happen, I'm grateful to have threads like these to
perpetually modify my contemporary music spanners at each new release.

thank you for your attention,
Jeff

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:33 PM, David Kastrup <dak@> wrote:

> Janek Warchoł <janek.lilypond@> writes:
>
> >>> - you can pay one of the experienced developers to implement
> >>> specifically this feature.  But that would probably be expensive, as
> >>> programming work is expensive in general.  You'll probably need to
> >>> find several other people willing to pay for this.
> >>
> >> I'm confused, I thought David was a developer - no?
> >
> > Yes, he is.  Our most active one at the moment.
> >
> >> You said paying him would not be a likely path to seeing
> >> this boxed notation implemented further, but rather just to help
> LilyPond
> >> in general, progress as software.
> >
> > It depends.  You can add $10/month to the "general David fund", just
> > to enable David working on LilyPond in general (that's continouous
> > financial support).  Or you can negotiate a specific contract with him
> > - or someone else - where you'd give that person a significantly
> > bigger amount of money once and he'd implement something specific
> > (that's hiring a programmer to implement a feature).
>
> There is also David Nalesnik who has been the one doing the previous
> implementation IIRC.
>
> The situation with me is that LilyPond users and developers are keeping
> me financially afloat with the understanding that I spend my available
> time on improving LilyPond according to what I consider best at the
> moment.
>
> Since I am excellent at programming and awful at self-discipline, this
> arrangement tends to deliver quite better value for the money than
> actually hiring me for more specific tasks.  And if I got stuck on more
> specific tasks, that would be to the detriment of the people who are
> already contributing to my costs of living.
>
> So we are in the somewhat absurd situation that people tend to recommend
> my services in order to improve my finances, but that I actually don't
> feel like I can in good conscience offer to do non-trivial "side jobs"
> that can cause me to deadlock for longer times.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>




-----
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136361.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.