Re: [frogs] bend implementation

[Marc Hohl <marc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Carl Sorensen schrieb:
> [...]
> > But then, what's the difference between
> >
> > c \bend c { d e f }
> >
> > where the second c resembles the note from which the bend amount is
> > calculated,
> > and my
> >
> > c\startBend d e f\stopBend
> >
> > where the first c is used a) to print the note c and b) to tell the
> > engraver that everything following the c is to be considered as a bent note,
> > relative to the c? Ok, it's another syntax form and I am unsure which is
> > better
> > (for example, what would be the cleverest way to code a pre bend in both
> > approaches?)
> > but the fundamental principle is the same in my opinion.
> >
> >     
>
> Well, I could be wrong on all this.  But \startBend comes *after* the c that
> is the unbent note.  So the bend engraver would need to look backwards in
> time to get the unbent note, which seems to me to be a difficult thing to
> do.  Iterators move forward in time, not backward in time.
>   
Oops, then I seem to be terribly wrong. I thought that

c\startBend d e

will concern the c, not the notes afterwards. This is similar to

c\< d e

which starts a crescendo at the c, not at the d ...
> Secondly, the \startBend syntax doesn't allow for a prebend.
>
> But 
>
> c \bend d { e d}
>
> allows me to do a pre bend without printing the note.
>   
Well, the pre bend *is* indicated by a parenthesized stemless
grace note, but this should be doable anyway.

After writing my last message, I also had the idea that your
approach would be the clue to write pre bends in an easy way.
> It's not so much the syntax that I'm talking about here; it's the music
> structures I'm thinking about.  Just like there is RelativeOctaveMusic that
> contains a bunch of note-events, I'm thinking that BendMusic could contain a
> bunch of note-events, as well as a reference pitch.
>
> It might be possible to do \bend similar to \relative, where with \relative
> if you don't specify a pitch, the first pitch in the \relative music is the
> reference pitch.
>
> \bend {c d e f}
>
> would do an unbent c, followed by a bent d, e, and f.
>
> In contrast
>
> \bend c {d e f} 
>
> would do a prebend from c to d, then do a bent d, e, and f.
>
> I'm not positive this is the right way, but I think it's getting closer. And
> I think that defining a BendMusic or BentMusic music expression is the best
> way I've thought of yet to get bends in the music tree.
>
>   
Ok, the Ben[d|t]Music music expression approach seems to be
sensible - do you have some places in the sources for me to get a feel
of working on such a structure?

Thanks

Marc


---
----
Join the Frogs!