Hi David, 2012/2/12 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@googlemail.com> writes: > >> 2012/2/11 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: >>> Thomas Morley <thomasmorle...@googlemail.com> writes: >>> >>>> Personally I'd prefer sth like the attached. But it might not work >>>> with the latest devel-version due to the changes with EventChord. (I >>>> can't test it. "2.15.24" is currently my highest version.) >>> >>> I have not checked this in practice, but theoretically, the only >>> affected function would appear to be keepOnlyFirstNote (or so), and >>> since this function makes a difference only when there is more than one >>> note, namely, when there _is_ an EventChord, I don't think that the >>> EventChord changes should cause any difference here. >>> >>> Of course, if you use chord repetitions (q) here, keepOnlyFirstNote will >>> only be able to do its job if you have already run \chordRepeats >>> manually (instead of waiting for its automatic run at the start of >>> typesetting). > > On second thought, it will repeat a chord that has already been reduced > to a single note, and so again will do exactly what is needed. > >> as soon as I made an upgrade I'll test it. > > If it is important, I could do this myself, but actually I think that we > need every active and attentive user we can get to test the current > almost-before-stable-release versions on as much of their own code as > feasible. > > -- > David Kastrup
just finished the upgrade to "2.15.29". Testing chord-rhythm-02.ly compiles fine without any pronlem. Other task? :) Best, Harm _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
