On 1/23/09 8:56 AM, "Chris Snyder" <csny...@adoromusicpub.com> wrote:
> 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.
I think if you want to have two spanned arpeggios at the same music moment
with different kinds of arpeggio symbol, you need to use \tweak instead of
\override.
I wouldn't worry about that for now.
Carl
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
