Re: addFingering

[David Wright]

On Mon 16 Jan 2017 at 12:08:28 (+0100), Gianmaria Lari wrote:
> I'm sorry, clearly there is a misunderstanding and it is probably from my
> side, my apologies.
> 
> Let's me try to explain what I mean. Try to have a look to this code and
> the related output (it is attached).

There seem to be two directions in which you want to change LP.
The first, which my comment was directed at, was to force writing
an unnecessary \relative { } inside another \relative { } construction,
going from (in your example)

\relative c' {
....somemusic.....
\repeat unfold 4 { c e g }
....somemusic.....
 }

to

{
  \repeat unfold 2 \relative c' {c e g}
}

That's what I directed my "What side effect and exceptional behaviour?
The orthogonality between what and what?" at.

But your response here addresses a second point, the
interpretation of \repeat unfold. Looking at my attached
example, it seems to me that you want "\repeat unfold 2 { foo }"
to behave like "foo foo" (B and C). But, if that's what you want,
why not write "foo foo"? "foo foo" duplicates the notes in the
source, but it isn't a textual repeat in the LP sense (like
FR, A, D and E).

And if you want to automate it for n≫2, find/write a function
to do it.

I think one source of confusion might be that it's easy to use
\repeat unfold as a shorthand for what you want here, and it does
work that way at one level. However, it's really something different.
Look at the parallels between FR&A, and D&E.

People get hoisted on a vaguely similar petard when they think
that R1 * 5 is five whole-note-rests when it's more accurate
to say it's one five-whole-note-duration-rest that usually gets
set as five whole-note-rests.

Cheers,
David.

unfold.ly
Description: Text document

unfold.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document