[Denemo-devel] d-MeasureFull?

[Richard Shann]

Nils,
I think we should change the name of the procedure d-MeasureFull
(defined in denemo.scm). I suggest

(define (MeasureFullStatus) ....

The reasons are, firstly the '?' at the end is a convention for
something that returns a boolean (I think). At the very least it should
return #f if the answer to the (terse) question MeasureFull? is no. (Ok,
so it is ambiguous what that means, if it is over-full is it still
full?). Secondly, d- is a prefix by C to avoid clashes with variables
defined in scheme. There are a few cases where it seemed a good idea to
use that naming convention in denemo.scm for uniformity - completing the
set of d-Directive-xxx things.

As far as I can see, there are no scripts that use it outside denemo.scm
so this should be a harmless change. In fact, the only uses seem to be
to test if the status is not #f. Perhaps three procedures would be good

(define (MeasureIsUnderfull?) (equal? (MeasureFullStatus) #f))

(define (MeasureIsOverfull?) (equal? (MeasureFullStatus) 2))

(define (MeasureIsFull?) (equal? (MeasureFullStatus) 1))   - or perhaps
MeasureIsExact? if the ambiguity seems too strong

(If I have got the scheme syntax right).

For reference the current code is below
Richard

;;;;;;;Get Measure Filling Status
(define (d-MeasureFull?)
(let script ((MaxTicks 0) (return #f))
(d-PushPosition)
(d-GoToMeasureEnd)
(set! MaxTicks (* 1536 (d-GetTimeSignature #t) )) ; How many ticks are
in a 100% filled measure?

(set! return (cond 
        ((not(d-GetEndTick)) #f) ; empty
        ((< (d-GetEndTick) MaxTicks) #f) ; underful
        ((= MaxTicks (d-GetEndTick)) 1)  ; 100% filled
        ((< MaxTicks (d-GetEndTick)) 2) ; >100% filled
        (else  (display "strange!")) ; ?
        ))
  (d-PopPosition)
  return
))