Hey! Yeah! Why not!?
	This is what I've been wishing for since my days as an undergrad pup using
csound on a Vax!
	Imagine using the word 'composition' in csound without having to put the
quotes around it!
	My vote's for this, too. Doesn't sound like it should be _earth
shattering_ to implement, either. But I'd understand if it got put off to
3.49....


At 09:30 AM 4/14/98 PDT, Hans Pelleboer wrote:
>Dear group,
>Another proposal. In order to allow for loops in scores with different
>lengths,
>I thought along these lines: Fit the repeat statement-to-be with the 
>following variables, so that it can be invoked multiple times in one score
>--and perhaps even recursively. 
>
>e.g.;
>
>Repeat statement   
>  |             start time
>  |               |          section length
>  |               |             |          number of repeats
>  |               |             |           |
>  r            -s4          -l20      -n6
>; then the score fragment
>( a tempo statement here perhaps?)
>i1 0 .5  1024  440.............
>i1 1  .75 1500 ..............
>i1 .........................
>...............
>...........
>r  -e ;  some termination flag to demarcate the end of the section
>
>
>This would TREMENDOUSLY enhance the power of the score language; 
>e.g. generate polymorphically perverse polyrhythms, generating complex
>structures out of a few `cells' , reinvent the hemiola, allow for multiple
>meters in the same score, without requiring multiple compilations 
>-- help!, this starts to sound like we finally would be able to actually 
>COMPOSE something with this stuff!
>
>Spem in alium,
>
>Hans Pelleboer
>
>
>
>