> > > Your proposal seems clever enough. I've added this, but you have to > > > set barCheckSynchronize to #f for it to work. > > > > Thanks a lot! This new barcheck is just great. It's now harder than I > > expected to fool it into doing O(n) warnings (and I'm not sure it uses > > exactly my suggestion, but anyways it seems to work even better than it > > would :) ). > > > > I found some barcheck related issues: > > (i). A further improvement (and simplification?) of the barcheck > > mechanism: Whenever a barcheck fails, \skip the rest of the bar in the > > context where the > > Adding a \skip on the fly is definitely not a simplification.
OK, then it was not a good idea (I do not know anything about lilypond's internal representations, thus my guesses about which changes that require reasonable amount of work are not always correct). > You have many ideas, but the point of barcheck is to indicate > errors. I think that it is pointless to be pedantically correct if > errors have already been detected. Yep, except that often, many barcheck errors often occur at once, just like octave errors use to do. And then it's practical to be able to fix all errors at once without recompiling (for me, this is the big point with \octave: when using it, you can correct several octave errors at once). But definitely, it is not an extremely important issue, especially not as long as it would be clumsy to implement. > For the last case, I can imagine > your reasoning, but \addlyrics (and its more modern friend > \newaddlyrics) are enough of a bitch to get working without all the > fancy things. > > I propose to look at this again once more pressing issues have been > resolved. yes, aometimes I am just too much of a perfectionist. Note that I had an even more extreme version of my suggestion, which I chose not to send :) I agree it's not so high priority, I just tend to send in my ideas when they pop up. Just so they can be placed somewhere in the todo. Erik _______________________________________________ Bug-lilypond mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
