fixed vs relative

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

fixed vs relative

Gianmaria Lari
I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond ml.

I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I decided to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative mode is much more annoying than writing in fixed way.... 

But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor would propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?

For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after 

b' 

and then you type 

c

What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?

This is just an idea.
Best regards, g.

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

David Kastrup
Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:

> I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond ml.
>
> I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I decided
> to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative mode is
> much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
>
> But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in
> relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor would
> propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
>
> For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
>
> b'
>
>
> and then you type
>
> c
>
>
> What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
>
> This is just an idea.

You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice versa?

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Urs Liska-3


Am 9. Mai 2019 20:20:36 MESZ schrieb David Kastrup <[hidden email]>:

>Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the
>lilypond ml.
>>
>> I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I
>decided
>> to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative
>mode is
>> much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
>>
>> But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in
>> relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor
>would
>> propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
>>
>> For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
>>
>> b'
>>
>>
>> and then you type
>>
>> c
>>
>>
>> What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
>>
>> This is just an idea.
>
>You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice
>versa?

I don't know if Gianmaria is aware of that, but (although I don't write in absolute mode myself) I can imagine that an autocomplete-style feature could be nice.

This should not be too hard to do in Frescobaldi - if "someone" would we interested in doing it ...

Urs

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Gianmaria Lari
In reply to this post by David Kastrup


On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 20:20, David Kastrup <[hidden email]> wrote:
Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:

> I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond ml.
>
> I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I decided
> to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative mode is
> much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
>
> But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in
> relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor would
> propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
>
> For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
>
> b'
>
>
> and then you type
>
> c
>
>
> What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
>
> This is just an idea.

You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice versa?

Sure! And the conversion from relative to fixed is the first operation I do with Frescobaldi each time I interact with a score written in relative mode.....

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

David Wright
In reply to this post by David Kastrup
On Thu 09 May 2019 at 20:20:36 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:

> Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> > I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond ml.
> >
> > I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I decided
> > to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative mode is
> > much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
> >
> > But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in
> > relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor would
> > propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
> >
> > For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
> >
> > b'
> >
> >
> > and then you type
> >
> > c
> >
> >
> > What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
> >
> > This is just an idea.
>
> You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice versa?

As can the   ly   standalone (derived from F~ possibly).

But if you can coerce an editor into doing this trick, I would suggest
that absolute is a better target than fixed. Perhaps you meant that anyway.

However, there may be a downside. With relative, a wrong decision on
one note has a dramatic effect on the following music, but is easily
corrected with one tick. When this trick has been applied, many
notes may have to be individually tickled after the mistake is
discovered.

Cheers,
David.

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Gianmaria Lari


On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 21:32, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu 09 May 2019 at 20:20:36 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
> Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> > I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond ml.
> >
> > I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I decided
> > to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative mode is
> > much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
> >
> > But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in
> > relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor would
> > propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
> >
> > For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
> >
> > b'
> >
> >
> > and then you type
> >
> > c
> >
> >
> > What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
> >
> > This is just an idea.
>
> You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice versa?

As can the   ly   standalone (derived from F~ possibly).

Sorry I don't understand.
 
But if you can coerce an editor into doing this trick, I would suggest
that absolute is a better target than fixed. Perhaps you meant that anyway.

What's the difference? I was thinking they were synonimus in lilypond talking.
 
However, there may be a downside. With relative, a wrong decision on
one note has a dramatic effect on the following music, but is easily
corrected with one tick. When this trick has been applied, many
notes may have to be individually tickled after the mistake is
discovered.

Maybe you're right. Or maybe the fact to see clearly what the editor propose you (for each note) make you very self conscious of what you write. 

Generally I appreciate the autocomplete feature even if I found it making my though less fluent (but maybe it's better :))
g.



 
Cheers,
David.

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

David Kastrup
In reply to this post by David Wright
David Wright <[hidden email]> writes:

> one note has a dramatic effect on the following music, but is easily
> corrected with one tick. When this trick has been applied, many notes
> may have to be individually tickled after the mistake is discovered.

I was of the opinion that Frescobaldi can transpose regions.  That
should be usable for octave-shifting, shouldn't it?

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Urs Liska-3


Am 9. Mai 2019 21:52:49 MESZ schrieb David Kastrup <[hidden email]>:
>David Wright <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> one note has a dramatic effect on the following music, but is easily
>> corrected with one tick. When this trick has been applied, many notes
>> may have to be individually tickled after the mistake is discovered.
>
>I was of the opinion that Frescobaldi can transpose regions.  That
>should be usable for octave-shifting, shouldn't it?

Yes, but it can quickly become cumbersome. The function works upon a selection in the document. I'd say that chances are that once you're in need of correction after the fact you may not have a continuous section with the same error. What about mis-octavized chord notes for example? They might well be wrongnkn different ways.
.Urs

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Urs Liska-3
In reply to this post by Gianmaria Lari


Am 9. Mai 2019 21:40:30 MESZ schrieb Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]>:

>On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 21:32, David Wright <[hidden email]>
>wrote:
>
>> On Thu 09 May 2019 at 20:20:36 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
>> > Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:
>> >
>> > > I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the
>lilypond
>> ml.
>> > >
>> > > I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally
>I
>> decided
>> > > to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in
>relative
>> mode is
>> > > much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
>> > >
>> > > But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music
>in
>> > > relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your
>editor
>> would
>> > > propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
>> > >
>> > > For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
>> > >
>> > > b'
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > and then you type
>> > >
>> > > c
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
>> > >
>> > > This is just an idea.
>> >
>> > You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice
>> versa?
>>
>> As can the   ly   standalone (derived from F~ possibly).
>>
>
>Sorry I don't understand.
>

He refers to the Python script 'ly'. This is indeed a standalone version. I've the code powering Frescobaldi's handling of LilyPond code.


>
>> But if you can coerce an editor into doing this trick, I would
>suggest
>> that absolute is a better target than fixed. Perhaps you meant that
>anyway.
>>
>
>What's the difference? I was thinking they were synonimus in lilypond
>talking.
>
>
>> However, there may be a downside. With relative, a wrong decision on
>> one note has a dramatic effect on the following music, but is easily
>> corrected with one tick. When this trick has been applied, many
>> notes may have to be individually tickled after the mistake is
>> discovered.
>>
>
>Maybe you're right. Or maybe the fact to see clearly what the editor
>propose you (for each note) make you very self conscious of what you
>write.
>
>Generally I appreciate the autocomplete feature even if I found it
>making
>my though less fluent (but maybe it's better :))
>g.
>
>
>
>
>
>> Cheers,
>> David.
>>

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

David Wright
In reply to this post by Gianmaria Lari
On Thu 09 May 2019 at 21:40:30 (+0200), Gianmaria Lari wrote:

> On Thu, 9 May 2019 at 21:32, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu 09 May 2019 at 20:20:36 (+0200), David Kastrup wrote:
> > > Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> writes:
> > >
> > > > I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond
> > ml.
> > > >
> > > > I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I
> > decided
> > > > to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative
> > mode is
> > > > much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
> > > >
> > > > But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in
> > > > relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor
> > would
> > > > propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
> > > >
> > > > For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
> > > >
> > > > b'
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > and then you type
> > > >
> > > > c
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
> > > >
> > > > This is just an idea.
> > >
> > > You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice
> > versa?
> >
> > As can the   ly   standalone (derived from F~ possibly).
> >
>
> Sorry I don't understand.

ly, packaged as python3-ly in Debian, has a number of commands hived
off (I assume) from Fresco including: re-indent, reformat, translate
the language, transpose, abs2rel, rel2abs, simplify-accidentals, etc.

> > But if you can coerce an editor into doing this trick, I would suggest
> > that absolute is a better target than fixed. Perhaps you meant that anyway.
>
> What's the difference? I was thinking they were synonimus in lilypond
> talking.

AIUI, in \absolute, c' generates middle C and only middle C; in
\relative, c' generates a C which is at least a fifth above the
previous note; and in \fixed, c' generates a C within the octave
above the reference octave.

> > However, there may be a downside. With relative, a wrong decision on
> > one note has a dramatic effect on the following music, but is easily
> > corrected with one tick. When this trick has been applied, many
> > notes may have to be individually tickled after the mistake is
> > discovered.
>
> Maybe you're right. Or maybe the fact to see clearly what the editor
> propose you (for each note) make you very self conscious of what you write.

The "wrong decision" that I was talking about was where you think a
note needs a tick (that the editor proposed) when it doesn't¹. The
mistake is only revealed when LP has run and the notehead (and those
following) is an octave off the correct position.

> Generally I appreciate the autocomplete feature even if I found it making
> my though less fluent (but maybe it's better :))

¹ or vice versa.

Cheers,
David.

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

python3-ly WAS Re: fixed vs relative

Andrew Bernard
HI David,

Well I am delighted utterly. I can't use Frescobaldi anymore as the program takes minutes to position the cursor in my complex scores, due to issues that have been discussed on detail on the lists. So I switched to gvim (principally because the emacs lilypond mode is buggy and the indenting does not work right), and even wrote a guide for people about how to set this up for point and click on Ubuntu. But I keep having to fire up Frescobaldi just to re-indent the code, which is tiresome and not very fluent, and I have to put up with it being improperly indented until I do this.

Now that you have wiped the dust from my eyes and shown me python3-ly and the reformat command, I can just run this filter over the buffer in gvim. Fantastic. A dream come true. I never imagined the reformatting code was externalised from the core Frescoabdi code, so I never looked. I had begun to think I have to write my own syntax level indenter to do the job.

I am indebted to you for this knowledge.

Andrew


On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 10:50, David Wright <[hidden email]> wrote:

ly, packaged as python3-ly in Debian, has a number of commands hived
off (I assume) from Fresco including: re-indent, reformat, translate
the language, transpose, abs2rel, rel2abs, simplify-accidentals, etc.

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Urs Liska-3
In reply to this post by David Wright

Am 10.05.19 um 02:46 schrieb David Wright:

>
>>>> You know that Frescobaldi can convert absolute to relative and vice
>>> versa?
>>>
>>> As can the   ly   standalone (derived from F~ possibly).
>>>
>> Sorry I don't understand.
> ly, packaged as python3-ly in Debian, has a number of commands hived
> off (I assume) from Fresco including: re-indent, reformat, translate
> the language, transpose, abs2rel, rel2abs, simplify-accidentals, etc.

Originally ly was the module *inside* Frescobaldi handling all the stuff
relating to the LilyPond input code. This includes functions like code
formatting, musical changes, trying to keep track of where we are in the
music etc.

At some point Wilbert decided to a) remove any dependencies on Qt (the
application development framework used in Frescobaldi) from that code,
b) factor it out into an external module and c) make a standalone script
wrapping some of its functionality.

So a number of functions are available through that 'ly' command line
script, and it's also possible to 'import ly' in Python programs. At
some later point I also added an HTTP server wrapper so you could
actually use 'ly' in a web application to submit your LilyPond code for
processing in a website.

When Frescobaldi decided to completely move to Python 3, dropping all
Python 2 compatibility efforts this was deliberately *not* applied to
python-ly, so that is a plain Python 2/3 library that can be used from
both Python versions, without any PyQt dependencies.

Just for some clarification.
Urs



_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: fixed vs relative

Vaughan McAlley
In reply to this post by Gianmaria Lari
On Fri, 10 May 2019 at 04:00, Gianmaria Lari <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I saw the discussion about fixed vs relative few times in the lilypond ml.
>
> I think it's a lot about personal taste and habit and personally I decided to stick to fixed mainly because I find fixing mistakes in relative mode is much more annoying than writing in fixed way....
>
> But what if the editor would help a bit? What if you enter music in relative mode (don't worrying to specify the octave) but your editor would propose the "correct" (nearest) octave to add?
>
> For example suppose your cursor is immediatly after
>
> b'
>
>
> and then you type
>
> c
>
>
> What if the editor proposes to autocomplete with '' ?
>
> This is just an idea.
> Best regards, g.
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email]

(Sorry for the duplicate Gianmaria, replied without adding lilypond-user)

This is what I use- it works in both relative and absolute mode. Still Linux only because I haven't learned Python and QT just yet...



Vaughan

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user