Carl D. Sorensen wrote: > Sounds to me like we have a winner. Chris, will you take on this task? I > think you'll find that the people on -devel are happy to answer coding > questions. Everybody wants more people who can fix/modify LilyPond code, so > we're all happy to help somebody get up to speed.
I was afraid that would happen. <g> I'll take it on; I've looked at this section of the code enough that I have somewhat of an idea what's going on, so this would be a good place to start. One thought: perhaps this would be a good time to fix the current inability to have spanned and non-spanned arpeggios in the same point in time? The first issue with this would be the notation: I'd propose adding a \spannedArpeggio command alongside of the \arpeggio command and removing the connect-arpeggios property. Span_arpeggio_engraver could then be included by default in the Score context, since it would be harmless unless \spannedArpeggio's are used. The question is then: what about two spanned arpeggios at once? We'd need some kind of identifier mechanism (\spannedArpeggio="xx" ?). That starts to get ugly. Thanks. -Chris _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
