Re: [frogs] Enhancement: string bends (issue216051)

[Neil Puttock <n.puttock@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 20 February 2010 18:34, Marc Hohl <marc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I don't know whether you followed the discussion between Carl and me
> closely,

I tried to, though it was difficult keeping up. :)

> but we ended up making \bend an *articulation* of a note (I wanted to use
> \bend
> as a spanner, but Carl convinced me not to do so). The main advantage is
> - as far as I can see - that it is possible to play intermediate notes
> between two
> bent notes by using the string information without explicitly creating
> spanners
> which would mean to use separate voices for each separate string involved.

But you're bending (sorry :) the implementation of the (much simpler)
String_bend_engraver to suit features you require for a TabStaff,
which seems to me an unnecessary complication.

I definitely think you'd be better off using a music function to
delimit the start and end points, then you can send individual
string-bend-events as required (either directly in the music function,
or via an iterator).

> Does this influence the performance very much? The engraver looks for a
> bend-event and saves a pitch information when there is none, otherwise
> he draws the bend.

Probably not.

> I pushed the patch as a discussion platform and furthermore, I want to
> archieve consensus before going further - I don't want to write an engraver
> if it is
> then told I should do it the other way.

What other way?

You'll definitely have to write an engraver in C++, since it won't be
possible using a scheme engraver (you can't set spanner bounds in
scheme).

Regards,
Neil

---
----
Join the Frogs!