Re: Let \time in mid-measure work without warning in some cases (issue 143450043 by address@hidden)

[dak]

On 2014/09/23 01:11:51, Dan Eble wrote:
> This is a simpler (easier to comprehend) change than what I proposed
in
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.lilypond.bugs/39790 .

> I rewrote the regression test "time-signature-midmeasure.ly" to focus
on a
> specific aspect of this feature: suppress the warning, so the output
is quite
> different.

I find this too hard to understand anyway and the decision taken too
arbitrary (probably only matching one particular music style): if we do
something like

\time 4/4 c4 \time 3/4

then the decision whether or not to start a new measure/warning will
likely change if some grace note occurs anywhere.

So I propose we junk the warning if we cannot place it accurately:
people who want whole-measure warnings are supposed to use barchecks
anyway.

So what else do we need to do?  When doing

\time 4/4 c1 \time 3/4 ...

or

\time 3/4 c2. \time 4/4 ...

we clearly want the new meter to start on the bar and not, say, have
time 4/4 notice that it only used up 3 beats and still has one to
extend.  So I'd say that \time ... should probably do an implicit
\partial 1*0, meaning that you need to override it _afterwards_ with a
different \partial if you don't actually want it to start a new bar.

I think that should get us rid of most problems, the main resulting
problem being that if \time occurs in several places at the same point
of time, one \partial (if one is desired) has to follow the last \time:
any \partial executed before the final \time of a time step would be
ignored.

I think "\time will start a new measure, follow it with \partial if you
don't want that" is a clear rule and probably not all that different
from what people would be expect/write without reading the manual
previously.

https://codereview.appspot.com/143450043/