reinhold.kainho...@gmail.com writes: > In particular, there are several cases: > > a) c1\<\breakDynamicSpan c\! => It should break the newly created \< > in all cases > b) c1\< c\breakDynamicSpan\! => It should break the existing \< > c) c1\< c\!\breakDynamicSpan => It should break the (no longer) > existing \< ?!? > d) c1\< c\breakDynamicSpan\> c\! => Should this break the \< or the > \>???? > e) c1\< c\>\breakDynamicSpan c\! => Should this break the \< or the > \>???? > > From an input perspective, d) and e) should work differently (i.e. the > order of events SHOULD matter), but the problem is that the engraver > receives the events reordered, with the break event always being the > first. Is there any way around this?
Let \breakDynamicSpan not register an event, but a tweak? That's pretty much the only way where you can be more selective than an event at time granularity can be. I have no idea what this is actually about in detail, I am just providing a keyword-triggered response. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
