>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Ellis <michael.f.el...@gmail.com> writes:
Michael> On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 4:46 PM, <pe...@chubb.wattle.id.au> Michael> wrote: >> What's more, is there a reason to have the structure in a different >> voice? Michael> Good question. For me, it's mostly about the DRY principle Michael> (don't repeat yourself). I'm in the process of writing a Michael> program that tries to maximize one's opportunities to exploit Michael> the repetitive aspects of most compositions when entering the Michael> notation for multiple voices. It's a work in progress, but Michael> if you're curious it lives at Michael> https://github.com/Michael-F-Ellis/TransLily My point I think is that the structure is the structure of the voice, not the structure of the staff. Which is why, BTW, the MIDI repeats don't unfold. Visibly the structure voice shows the repeats, but the repeats aren't actually in the music voice. So when you unfold you get: << \music { \structure \structure \structure } >> I Michael> As for the whole \repeat unfold business, I'd love to Michael> understand why LP can merge repeats in the PDF but can't do Michael> it MIDI. I know the developers are really smart folks, so it Michael> must be way more challenging than I'm imagining. t can't merge them in the PDF either. But when it prints them as repeat symbols, you can't tell from the printout. Try this: --- \version "2.18.0" music= << \new Staff << \new Voice \relative c' { c4 c c c } \new Voice \relative c' { \repeat volta 2 { s1 }} >> >> \score { \music } \score { \unfoldRepeats \music } --- And look at the PDF. The second system shows the unfolded structure. Peter C _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
