At 10:33 +0100 2/8/08, Richard Brekne wrote: >Grin... nothing like cutting through the back and forths and just >answering someones question. Not too much trouble when you can write a few lines of Perl to calculate the whole thing in a split second: for (split /[\n\r]/, $text) { if (m~([0-9]+)-([0-9]+/[0-9]+)~) { my $frac = eval qq~$2~; my $mm = sprintf '%.1f', ($1 + $frac) * 25.4; print "$_\t $mm mm. $/" }else{ print "$_$/"; } } > That said, these tables are contingent upon the actual speaking >lengths being what they are supposed to be. The idea of the >duplex('s) was to configure some pre-determined fractional >relationship to the speaking length into the back and front lengths, >yes ? Of course, but I'd rather go by published measurements than fiddle around with approximate actual measurements for an hour to make a difference of 1/2 millimetre or so that I may or may not respect in practice. JD
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC