Hello Steven On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:33:34 +0000, Steven Weber <pant...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> No, that is the problem. If you look at the file, you'll see in the first > example, I switch the time from 2/2 to 3/4 in the first alternative, and then > Lilypond automatically returns the second alternative to 2/2 time. However, > when I do the metadata/notes in separate variables, the automatic switch from > 3/4 back to 2/2 does not occur (and hence, you get all the barcheck errors). > > --Steven > > On 4/23/18, 11:59 AM, "James Lowe" <pkx1...@runbox.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 19:53:05 +0000, Steven Weber <pant...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > AlternativeRestores seem to work fine as long as your metadata & notes > are in the same block. If you separate them into a metadata variable and a > notes variable, the second alternative is always in the same time signature > as the first alternative. > > > > This is against lilypond 2.19.81 on Windows. > > > > --Steven > > Your example is giving me barcheck errors for those entries using the > \skip values. > > Is this just a problem with your example? > > James > > We also had this reported by another user last year - something was nagging me at the back of my brain that I'd seen this recently, and so I dug back through the bug list emails and found it: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2017-09/msg00022.html (not so recent I guess) and I didn't see any reply/confirmation of this being a bug by those that know about development. The workaround from the other user is to explicitly put the time signature directly in the alternate's construct . e.g metadata = { \time 2/2 \clef bass \repeat volta 2 { \skip 1*2/2*1 | } \alternative { { \time 3/4 \skip 1*3/4*1 | } { \time 2/2 \skip 1*2/2*1 | } % <---- add the \time 2/2 here } \skip 1*2/2*1 | } notes = { \repeat volta 2 { c2 e | } \alternative { { f4 e d | } { \time 2/2 f2 d | } % <---- add the \time 2/2 here } g1 | } Then it compiles (without bar check warnings) OK as far as I can tell. I think that LilyPond is just not able to cope with the ambiguity of the mix of time signatures in the alternate repeats when you use a << >> construct. So the issue is (again I think I am not qualified to say for certain) not with the alternate restores but the simultaneous construct but I don't think this is a bug but a feature. Maybe others in the dev team can comment and perhaps we can add something to the doc (if it is not a bug) as a 'Known issue'. Regards James _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
