This serves as a reference to all the preparations and deliberations Urs (and others) have made for fixing/reimplementing beam subdivision.
The topic has been discussed here and here.
Issues: #2361 Issues: #2474 Issues: #4738 Issues: #4739 Issues: #4740 Issues: #4919
Related issues: [#1515] [#2361] [#2474] [#4738] [#4739] [#4740] [#4919]
Issues: #1515 Issues: #2361 Issues: #2474 Issues: #4738 Issues: #4739 Issues: #4740 Issues: #4919
Attached is the work I have spent analyzing the issue.
I want to stress that this is also related to wrong handling of tuplets, whose fix is sort of a prerequisite to get beam subdivisions right.
\relative { \tuplet 3/2 2 { c'4 d8 e f4 } g2 }
shows what I mean: The middle triplet is broken (not beamed), obviously because LilyPond does not consider the group as a "virtual" 3/4 measure with a 2 2 2 grouping, but as 2/4 of a 4/4 measure where the possible break point is at the "real" beat.
Related issues: [#1515] [#2361] [#2474] [#4738] [#4739] [#4740] [#4919]
Related
Issues: #1515
Issues:
#2361Issues: #2474
Issues:
#4738Issues:
#4739Issues:
#4740Issues: #4919
Attached is the work I have spent analyzing the issue.
I want to stress that this is also related to wrong handling of tuplets, whose fix is sort of a prerequisite to get beam subdivisions right.
shows what I mean: The middle triplet is broken (not beamed), obviously because LilyPond does not consider the group as a "virtual" 3/4 measure with a 2 2 2 grouping, but as 2/4 of a 4/4 measure where the possible break point is at the "real" beat.