Re: Survey: Large scores

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sat, Apr 18, 2015 at 05:54:44PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
[...] 
> > The only really painful part was the partcombiner
> 
> This is a big one for me. I would love to see — and would be happy to
> help fund — a GUPPY (Grand Unified Partcombiner Project, Yay!) to
> tackle a rewrite from the ground up, taking into account all the
> recent advances in divisi writing (still only in openlilylib, I
> believe), etc.
[...]

I am very interested in this prospective project, and would love to chip
in whenever I have the time. The partcombiner has also caused me quite a
lot of headaches, the latest one being the poor way it interacts with
\tag. It took me a few hours to figure out that was the problem, and
till now I still have not been able to implement a solution (though now
that I know what the problem is, at least the way to work around it is
clear).

Is \partcombine implemented in C++ or Scheme? While my C++ skills are
far beyond my Scheme skills (only started learning Scheme because of
lilypond), I think for maximum configurability and longevity it should
probably be implemented in Scheme, so that if all else fails, users at
least have the option of overriding parts of the Scheme code. Whereas if
it was in C++, not everyone has the required setup to be able to
recompile lilypond themselves.


T

-- 
Жил-был король когда-то, при нём блоха жила.