Erik Sandberg wrote:
On Friday 07 July 2006 16:34, Graham Percival wrote:
\noTimeSignature
c4 c c c | d d d d \partial 4 d | c c c c
That's still a different concept than using \partial in the beginning of a
piece. IMHO, using \partial mid-piece is bad practise, because it's difficult
to read,
Hmm, ok.
IMHO, I think the best practise for creating a single bar with length, is to
use
\set Timing.barLength = #(make-moment ...)
at the beginning of the bar, plus a corresponding \unset after the bar. The
set/unset is of course cumbersome, which is why some people currently prefer
the \partial hack to seemingly achieve the same thing. This is in turn is why
I suggest that we add a new command. (when thinking about it, I like best the
\makeBar {d4 d d d d} syntax)
I'm convinced as far as proper notation goes. But I'd still like to
have a "add time" command to avoid some bugs. I agree that it's a bad
reason, but unless there's a better way to do it, some notation won't work.
In an ideal world we wouldn't need workarounds like this, but it's
useful to have a "fudge factor" \partial. Perhaps we could rename it,
and hide it somewhere in the manual under "advanced tweaks"? :)
Here's the example (and the only time I use \partial inside a piece)
\layout{ ragged-right = ##t }
\relative c'' { << \new Staff {
%\cadenzaOn
g1
\key g \major \time 2/2
%\partial 64 s64
\acciaccatura{ c16[ b a] }
%\cadenzaOff
g1
} \new Staff {
c,1
\key g \major \time 2/2
%s64
c1
}
>>
}
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
