On Sat, 15 Sep 2012 11:24:30 +0200 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> wrote:
> Hugh Resnick writes: > > >> Consider lumping your measures together, so: s1*3 instead of s1 s1 > >> s1 > >> > >> —Josiah > > > > Perfect. Thank you so much. > > I'd like to ask some more silly questions here > > * why is this [*3] necessary? Phil responded already, but here's my couple of cents: s generally works like r or R, so having consistent behavior can be useful. Since I separate out formal elements from musical content, it's nice to have multimeasure break points that will exist in all parts, and this seems to be the best way to do it. > and if it is necessary, then > > * why isn't it obvious? > > and if it isn't obvious, then > > * why does the documentation fail? Although I don't think it's strictly necessary, I do find it very useful. I don't think it was obvious to me, and I vaguely recall working it out with trial and error, so perhaps it would be good to improve the documentation in this regard. —Josiah _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
