2013/6/23 Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@gmail.com>:
> 2013/6/23 Danny <dbpolyph...@gmail.com>:
>>> I'm not top posting.
>>
>> \version "2.16.2"
>>
>> % If a clef is changed in retrograde it only prints the new clef
>> % It does not move the notes to their new locations on the staff
>> % All notes here are the same pitch but during clef changes it is printed
>> % incorrectly
>>
>> \relative c' {
>> c1 % printed correctly
>> \retrograde {
>> c %printed correctly
>> \clef treble
>> c %printed as though in bass clef
>> \clef treble
>> c % Should be one ledger line above not below the staff in bass clef
>> \clef bass
>> c % Correctly printed in the assumed Treble clef
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> bug-lilypond mailing list
>> bug-lilypond@gnu.org
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
>
> Hi,
>
> thanks for your report.
>
> \retrograde was implemented in 2.13.x
> See
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/changes-big-page.html
>
> There you can read:
> "A minimal composer toolkit of modal transformations is provided. A
> motif may be transposed, inverted and/or converted to its retrograde
> within any scale."
> This should be read as: "A composer toolkit, with minimal functionality." ;)
>
> In 2.17.-NR
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/changing-multiple-pitches#retrograde
> you can read
> "Known issues and warnings
> Manual ties inside \retrograde will be broken and generate warnings. ... "
>
> Though not only Ties are broken. As the Nr-example shows Slurs are not
> printed. Hairpins will return warnings, every simple \override will
> lead to surprising results, setting clef-changes (much more complex,
> than a simple \override), too.
>
> So far I've tested.
>
> So yes, \retrograde should be improved.
> I'd call it an enhancement-request.
>
> -Harm
@bug-squad
Please don't forget to create a tracker for this. I limited my work to
do some testings.
General policy-question:
Sometimes I reply to some mails on this list, before a
bug-squad-member answered. (To do some analysis; solve a problem,
which would have better sent to the user-list; etc)
Is this ok? Or should I let a bug-squad-member answer first?
Cheers,
Harm
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
