On 07.11.2015 11:54, Richard Shann wrote:
In some circumstances LilyPond leaves a glissando invisible:
\version "2.19.25"
{
d'' 4\glissando cis'' 4 c'' b' }
I looked up the issues list and found this:
{ \override Glissando #'minimum-length = #5
\override Glissando #'springs-and-rods = #ly:spanner::set-spacing-rods
d'' 4\glissando cis'' 4 c'' b' }
but before I did that I just used a command available in Denemo thus:
{ d'' 4\glissando \once \override NoteColumn.X-offset = #2
cis'' 4 c'' b' }
These achieve similar effects for this tiny example, I wonder if someone
could give me some insights into the merits or demerits of these
approaches?
The first one is clearly preferable. Firstly, it’s more semantically
appropriate, because it better matches the reason you need a tweak. And
LilyPond much tends to reward staying with semantically correct
solutions. Such also in this case:
The second version won’t work at all if there is another voice with the
same notes in the same staff(1), and in other cases it will break
vertical alignment of voices, which you’ll likely not want.
HTH, Simon
(1) E.g.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\version "2.19.28"
<<
{
d''4\glissando \once\override NoteColumn.X-offset = #2 cis''4 c'' b'
}
%%%% change the following to ‘\new Staff’ in order to test another
situation
\\
{
d''4 cis'' c'' b'
}
>>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%
(note the changed code formatting; IMO this is more compliant to
existent guidelines as well as to general usage (as far as there is such
a thing in the LilyPond community) and easier to read.)
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
