Re: Tempo mark alignment

[Xavier Scheuer]

I totally agree, there is a problem with textual Tempo marks alignment.

I wanted to report this too, then I saw issues 684, 700 and now 712 
reporting this, so I didn't. But since there are 3 unfixed issues 
reporting the same thing and since the first one is open for 8 months 
now, I allowed myself to bump this on lilypond-devel and bug-lilypond.


\tempo "text" should align on time-signature (at the beginning of the 
score). This is, to my opinion, the only and last "real" visual bug of 
lilypond compared to "professional-looking" scores. Other bugs are, 
according to me, more "occasional" and not "chronic" like this one.


You are considering this bug as "priority-medium". For me, simple user 
and for my usage of lilypond, it's a "priority-high" expectation to see 
this issue fixed.


Thanks a lot,


Xavier


PS : When I read this message again it looks a bit "offensive", this 
wasn't my goal. I really appreciate the work of every of you and I think 
lilypond is a extraordinary software making wonderful scores. So please 
forgive my rudeness, which is more a wish to see lilypond improved than 
an attack on people doing so a huge and great work. Thanks.



Jay Anderson a écrit :

Is there a good workaround for issue 712:
?

The quickest solution is to just use '\override Score.MetronomeMark
#'X-offset = #-10', but this is fragile. Is there a way to tell the
MetronomeMark to align to the bar?

This same issue exists for multi-measure rests (not just for church rests):
\version "2.12.2"
\paper { ragged-right = ##f }
\score {
  \new Staff {
\set Score.skipBars = ##t
\tempo "Lento"
R1*50 |
\tempo "Asdf"
R1 |
\tempo "Allegro con brio"
R1*50 |
  }
}

Would issue 684 fix this:
?

Thanks.

-Jay




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tempo mark alignment

[Graham Percival]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 09:37:19AM +0200, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> I wanted to report this too, then I saw issues 684, 700 and now 712  
> reporting this, so I didn't. But since there are 3 unfixed issues  
> reporting the same thing and since the first one is open for 8 months  
> now, I allowed myself to bump this on lilypond-devel and bug-lilypond.

You are NOT allowed to "bump" this.  We know about the bugs.
Nobody is submitting patches to solve them.  What should we do?
Wave a magic wand that fixes bug?  Believe me, if I had such a
magic wand, I'd spend all day waving it.

> You are considering this bug as "priority-medium". For me, simple user  
> and for my usage of lilypond, it's a "priority-high" expectation to see  
> this issue fixed.

You don't understand what the bug tracker priority messages mean,
so don't comment on them.

> PS : When I read this message again it looks a bit "offensive", this  
> wasn't my goal. I really appreciate the work of every of you and I think  
> lilypond is a extraordinary software making wonderful scores. So please  
> forgive my rudeness, which is more a wish to see lilypond improved than  
> an attack on people doing so a huge and great work. Thanks.

Ditto.  My goal is not to insult you into feeling bad; my goal is
to insult you into HELPING US FIX THINGS.  Learn scheme.  Join the
Frogs.  Contribute to lilypond.  If everybody sits around saying
"why doesn't somebody fix this", then it WILL NEVER BE FIXED.


(bloody mao, I'm going to add this as a FAQ item.)

Cheers,
- Graham


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: DOCS: revising LM "Score and Parts"

[Ian Hulin]

Jon,
You've put Linux-style bash shell commands to interpret this rule to 
differentiate what to do for the midi and pf files

if ...

don't forget that on Windows you're dealing with the cmd command-line 
interpreter rather than bash, so you may need to do a Windows-variant 
version of this rule.


On Windows, pull up a terminal window (click Flag/Run and type in cmd 
into the dialogue box), and then enter help at the command line.  You'll 
see all the Windows command-line stuff there.


Cheers,

Ian


Jonathan Kulp wrote:

Carl D. Sorensen wrote:



Now, the full score compiles if I change the score target to this:

   score:
$(LILY_CMD) Scores/$(piece).ly

So it looks like the Windows environment doesn't know how to deal with
the pattern rule defined at the top of the Makefile.

I'm encouraged that it's pretty easy to run lily files at the DOS
command line on Windows, at least.


Are you getting caught by the path separator:  it's \ in windows, but 
/ in

linux?



I don't think so.  You'll notice that the score target that compiles 
correctly uses unix-style separator / instead of Windows \.  This works, 
I assume, because it is inside the Makefile, and GNU Make for Windows 
translates it.  It looks to me as if the Windows GNU Make has trouble 
with the pattern rule with the % signs: %.pdf %.midi: %.ly


Maybe someone who actually uses Windows can understand this better. 
Clearly this makefile isn't as portable as we'd hoped it would be.  As 
another approach I may go ahead and install cygwin on it, but I'm 
already growing weary of trying stuff that doesn't work.  I'm about 
ready to put the Makefile section in the docs with a big warning saying 
it doesn't work on Windows without a lot of tweaking.


Jon





___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Tempo mark alignment

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

Am Samstag, 23. Mai 2009 13:34:12 schrieb Graham Percival:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 09:37:19AM +0200, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> > PS : When I read this message again it looks a bit "offensive", this
> > wasn't my goal. I really appreciate the work of every of you and I think
> > lilypond is a extraordinary software making wonderful scores. So please
> > forgive my rudeness, which is more a wish to see lilypond improved than
> > an attack on people doing so a huge and great work. Thanks.
>
> Ditto.  My goal is not to insult you into feeling bad; my goal is
> to insult you into HELPING US FIX THINGS.  Learn scheme.  

Actually, this bug is not that easy. I was also quite annoyed by this a while 
ago, and started looking at it, but I ran into dead ends. This is one of the 
things that makes my orchestral scores not look quite as professional as they 
could be. Otherwise I would have submitted a patch already, but the problem is 
simply over my head.

BTW, there is an even worse aspect to this bug: If there are multimeasure 
rests following the tempo mark, the mark is even further to the right. This is 
only the case if a clef/time/key signature happens at that time, too.

Example file is attached.

Cheers,
Reinhold

-- 
--
Reinhold Kainhofer, reinh...@kainhofer.com, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org
\relative c'' {

  \tempo "test1" 
	R1*5 |
  \tempo "test2" 
	R1*5 |\break
	\tempo "test3"
  c4 c c c |
  \time 2/2 \tempo "test1" 
	R1*5 |
	\tempo "test2"
  c4 c c c |\break
	
	\compressFullBarRests
  \tempo "test" 
	R1*5 |
	\tempo "blah"
  c4 c c c |
  \time 2/2 \tempo "test" 
	R1*5 |
	\tempo "blah"
  c4 c c c |
} 


a.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: centering of instrument names

[Valentin Villenave]

2009/5/20 Francisco Vila :
> Maybe it's not that easy. If the right padding is intended to put the
> stencil to the rightmost side, the problem is that the extent of the
> brace (if any) is unknown at this moment.

And let's not forget that braces can have different sizes from one
system to another (e.g. whether there are two or three "braced" staves
in the system).

Anyway, I've added this one as
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=771 so it doesn't
get forgotten. I hope Neil's patch will close the issue soon ;-)

Regards,
Valentin


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: DOCS: revising LM "Score and Parts"

[Jonathan Kulp]

Are you just talking about the if .. then conditional part?  First I'll try
just commenting that whole thing out and see if it will compile, then I'll
try to figure out how to deliver the output to the right directories.
Thanks Ian,

Jon.

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Ian Hulin  wrote:

> Jon,
> You've put Linux-style bash shell commands to interpret this rule to
> differentiate what to do for the midi and pf files
> if ...
>
> don't forget that on Windows you're dealing with the cmd command-line
> interpreter rather than bash, so you may need to do a Windows-variant
> version of this rule.
>
> On Windows, pull up a terminal window (click Flag/Run and type in cmd into
> the dialogue box), and then enter help at the command line.  You'll see all
> the Windows command-line stuff there.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ian
>
>
>
> Jonathan Kulp wrote:
>
>> Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  Now, the full score compiles if I change the score target to this:

   score:
$(LILY_CMD) Scores/$(piece).ly

 So it looks like the Windows environment doesn't know how to deal with
 the pattern rule defined at the top of the Makefile.

 I'm encouraged that it's pretty easy to run lily files at the DOS
 command line on Windows, at least.

>>>
>>> Are you getting caught by the path separator:  it's \ in windows, but /
>>> in
>>> linux?
>>>
>>>
>> I don't think so.  You'll notice that the score target that compiles
>> correctly uses unix-style separator / instead of Windows \.  This works, I
>> assume, because it is inside the Makefile, and GNU Make for Windows
>> translates it.  It looks to me as if the Windows GNU Make has trouble with
>> the pattern rule with the % signs: %.pdf %.midi: %.ly
>>
>> Maybe someone who actually uses Windows can understand this better.
>> Clearly this makefile isn't as portable as we'd hoped it would be.  As
>> another approach I may go ahead and install cygwin on it, but I'm already
>> growing weary of trying stuff that doesn't work.  I'm about ready to put the
>> Makefile section in the docs with a big warning saying it doesn't work on
>> Windows without a lot of tweaking.
>>
>> Jon
>>
>>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> lilypond-devel@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
>



-- 
Jonathan Kulp
http://www.jonathankulp.com
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: centering of instrument names

[Joe Neeman]

On Fri, 2009-05-22 at 23:46 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> 2009/5/20 Francisco Vila :
> > 2009/5/20 Francisco Vila :
> >> The key code is this. Given a (big) amount of time I could figure out
> >> how it works and try to improve it.
> >>
> >> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=blobdiff;f=lily/system-start-text.cc;h=c99f150fed;hp=494ab1;hb=b12cf254;hpb=4d0abb92
> >
> > Maybe it's not that easy. If the right padding is intended to put the
> > stencil to the rightmost side, the problem is that the extent of the
> > brace (if any) is unknown at this moment.
> 
> The InstrumentName has to be attached to the left edge of the
> VerticalAxisGroup (i.e., the Staff), so the only way to position it is
> to apply padding on its right hand side; this moves it away from the
> system.  In order to prevent collisions between instrument names and
> PianoStaff braces, the system start delimiters are added as
> side-support-elements of each InstrumentName, thus leading to a
> variation in support extents depending on where each InstrumentName is
> attached to the system.
> 
> I think the simplest way to deal with this is to split it into two parts:
> 
> 1. Remove the side-support-elements so every InstrumentName has the
> same alignment anchor in the X-axis (i.e., the left edge of each
> stave).
> 
> This is a simple matter of removing the acknowledger for
> system-start-text in the System_start_delimiter_engraver.
> 
> 2. Calculate the combined extents of all the system start delimiters
> in a system, then apply an X-offset correction to each InstrumentName.
>  This ensures that there wil be no collisions between any
> InstrumentName and SystemStartBrace/Bracket/Bar/Square.

If I understand this correctly, you're suggesting that we pad each
instrument name according to the largest (wrt X-extent) SystemStartXXX.
Would this allow the attached layout (stolen from Valentin's bug
report), where the "Timpani in D, A" line is nicely centred, but it
slightly overlaps with the brace below it?

Joe
<>___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: centering of instrument names

[Neil Puttock]

2009/5/23 Joe Neeman :

> If I understand this correctly, you're suggesting that we pad each
> instrument name according to the largest (wrt X-extent) SystemStartXXX.

That's basically it, though the extent would be that of the greatest
number of stacked delimiters: for example, in the Haydn snippet, the
combined extents of the SystemStartBar, Bracket and Brace in Violins I
& II.

> Would this allow the attached layout (stolen from Valentin's bug
> report), where the "Timpani in D, A" line is nicely centred, but it
> slightly overlaps with the brace below it?

A similar effect could be achieved by setting a negative value for
'padding (see attached image), though it might be better to allow the
option of ignoring the extra padding (or reverting to the current
behaviour with side-support-elements).  It's precisely issues like
this which prompted me to send a proof-of-concept patch first.

Regards,
Neil
<>___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: [frogs] patch for issue 708

[Carl D. Sorensen]

Thanks,  Applied.

Valentin,

Can you change the status of 708 to fixed in 2.13.1?  And verify, at your
convenience?

Thanks,

Carl


On 5/22/09 9:11 PM, "Andrew Hawryluk"  wrote:

> This patch will allow convert-ly to process this:
> 
> \version "2.11.0"
> 
> {
> c d'4 ees
> \set Staff.keySignature = #`(((1 . 4) . 2) ((1 . 3) . 2) ((3 . 3) 2))
> 
> f^"some text"
> \set Staff.keySignature = #`(((1 . 4) . -2)
>  ((1 . 3) . -4))
> }
> 
> 
> and output this:
> 
> convert-ly (GNU LilyPond) 2.13.1
> Processing `test.ly'...
> Applying conversion: 2.11.2, 2.11.3, 2.11.5, 2.11.6, 2.11.10, 2.11.11,
> 2.11.13, 2.11.15, 2.11.23, 2.11.35, 2.11.38, 2.11.46, 2.11.48,
> 2.11.50, 2.11.51, 2.11.52, 2.11.53, 2.11.55, 2.11.57, 2.11.60,
> 2.11.61, 2.11.62, 2.11.64, 2.12.0, 2.12.3, 2.13.0,
> Not smart enough to convert Staff.keySignature - the alist is no
> longer in reversed order.
> 2.13.1
> \version "2.13.1"
> 
> {
> c d'4 ees
> \set Staff.keySignature = #`(((1 . 4) . ,SHARP)
>  ((1 . 3) . ,SHARP)
>  ((3 . 3) . ,SHARP))
> 
> f^"some text"
> \set Staff.keySignature = #`(((1 . 4) . ,FLAT)
>  ((1 . 3) . ,DOUBLE-FLAT))
> }



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: centering of instrument names

[Joe Neeman]

On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 23:38 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> 2009/5/23 Joe Neeman :
> 
> > If I understand this correctly, you're suggesting that we pad each
> > instrument name according to the largest (wrt X-extent) SystemStartXXX.
> 
> That's basically it, though the extent would be that of the greatest
> number of stacked delimiters: for example, in the Haydn snippet, the
> combined extents of the SystemStartBar, Bracket and Brace in Violins I
> & II.
> 
> > Would this allow the attached layout (stolen from Valentin's bug
> > report), where the "Timpani in D, A" line is nicely centred, but it
> > slightly overlaps with the brace below it?
> 
> A similar effect could be achieved by setting a negative value for
> 'padding (see attached image),

Fair enough, but I don't think 'padding has the right meaning here.
Ideally, 'padding should be the smallest distance between an
InstrumentName and the SystemStartXXX to its right. Here, it's the
distance between the rightmost InstrumentName and the leftmost
SystemStartXXX.

Having said that, I think this patch is a clear improvement over the
current behaviour and I don't at all object to having it applied.

Cheers,
Joe



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: centering of instrument names

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 5/23/09 6:48 PM, "Joe Neeman"  wrote:

> On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 23:38 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
>> 2009/5/23 Joe Neeman :
>> 
>>> If I understand this correctly, you're suggesting that we pad each
>>> instrument name according to the largest (wrt X-extent) SystemStartXXX.
>> 
>> That's basically it, though the extent would be that of the greatest
>> number of stacked delimiters: for example, in the Haydn snippet, the
>> combined extents of the SystemStartBar, Bracket and Brace in Violins I
>> & II.
>> 
>>> Would this allow the attached layout (stolen from Valentin's bug
>>> report), where the "Timpani in D, A" line is nicely centred, but it
>>> slightly overlaps with the brace below it?
>> 
>> A similar effect could be achieved by setting a negative value for
>> 'padding (see attached image),
> 
> Fair enough, but I don't think 'padding has the right meaning here.
> Ideally, 'padding should be the smallest distance between an
> InstrumentName and the SystemStartXXX to its right. Here, it's the
> distance between the rightmost InstrumentName and the leftmost
> SystemStartXXX.

Would 'minimum-space be a better property to use than 'padding?

Carl



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: [frogs] patch for issue 708

[Graham Percival]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 05:20:56PM -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
> Can you change the status of 708 to fixed in 2.13.1?  And verify, at your
> convenience?

Actually, the idea is that the programmer (or comitter) would
change the status to fixed, and Valentin would verify it when
2.13.1 GUB is released.

For 708, I've changed the status to fixed.

Cheers,
- Graham


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: centering of instrument names

[Joe Neeman]

On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 18:57 -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/23/09 6:48 PM, "Joe Neeman"  wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 23:38 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> >> A similar effect could be achieved by setting a negative value for
> >> 'padding (see attached image),
> > 
> > Fair enough, but I don't think 'padding has the right meaning here.
> > Ideally, 'padding should be the smallest distance between an
> > InstrumentName and the SystemStartXXX to its right. Here, it's the
> > distance between the rightmost InstrumentName and the leftmost
> > SystemStartXXX.
> 
> Would 'minimum-space be a better property to use than 'padding?

Possibly, but I think calling it 'padding is consistent with the meaning
of 'padding elsewhere. Actually, the existing 'minimum-space property
seems misnamed, since it's really more of a minimum offset.

Joe




___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

RE: centering of instrument names

[Kieren MacMillan]

Hi Neil (et al),

I'm definitely talkin' out the back of my head here, but...  =\

Can the instrument name blob take advantage of a "vertical skyline" 
("profile"?) the way the rest of the notation (notes, etc.) take advantage of a 
"horizontal skyline"? That would certainly solve the problem precisely, without 
having to manually adjust #'padding or whatever.

Cheers,
Kieren.


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: [frogs] patch for issue 708

[Patrick McCarty]

On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Graham Percival
 wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 05:20:56PM -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>> Can you change the status of 708 to fixed in 2.13.1?  And verify, at your
>> convenience?
>
> Actually, the idea is that the programmer (or comitter) would
> change the status to fixed, and Valentin would verify it when
> 2.13.1 GUB is released.
>
> For 708, I've changed the status to fixed.

I don't see the patch on git master.  Did you push the patch, Carl?

-Patrick


___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: [frogs] patch for issue 708

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 5/23/09 8:39 PM, "Patrick McCarty"  wrote:

> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 7:26 PM, Graham Percival
>  wrote:
>> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 05:20:56PM -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>>> Can you change the status of 708 to fixed in 2.13.1?  And verify, at your
>>> convenience?
>> 
>> Actually, the idea is that the programmer (or comitter) would
>> change the status to fixed, and Valentin would verify it when
>> 2.13.1 GUB is released.
>> 
>> For 708, I've changed the status to fixed.
> 
> I don't see the patch on git master.  Did you push the patch, Carl?

I did, but I had a network problem so it didn't finish.  It's there now.

Thanks,

Carl

> 
> -Patrick
> 
> ---
> 
> 
> Join the Frogs!
> 



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: [frogs] patch for issue 708

[Carl D. Sorensen]

On 5/23/09 8:26 PM, "Graham Percival"  wrote:

> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 05:20:56PM -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>> Can you change the status of 708 to fixed in 2.13.1?  And verify, at your
>> convenience?
> 
> Actually, the idea is that the programmer (or comitter) would
> change the status to fixed, and Valentin would verify it when
> 2.13.1 GUB is released.

OK.  I thought that only Valentin changed the status.

If committers are allowed to change the status, I'll do that in the future.

> 
> For 708, I've changed the status to fixed.

Thanks, Graham!

Carl



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel