date:20120810

On 07/08/12 00:01, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:

On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:

I think you're focusing on the wrong kind of architecture.

I'm talking about the architecture of computers that people can buy in
the shops today. While cute, a 192-way ARM server is useless in
realistic scenarios. See eg.
http://static.googleusercontent.com/external_content/untrusted_dlcp/research.google.com/pt-BR/us/pubs/archive/36448.pdf
- aka. "Let's use 9 pregnant women, we'd have a baby within the
month."

Yes, good point. Re the hardware, I agree that it's not the current
off-the-shelf package, but it _is_ clearly a direction that hardware is taking
into the future. It seems wise to anticipate that in planning the future
architecture of Lilypond.

Regarding parallelism, actually my real concern here isn't so much doing things
in parallel _per se_ so much as as Lilypond effectively breaking up its work
into smaller units, which might be dealt with in parallel or sequentially. Any
speed boost is nice, but not essential compared to scalability (more on that in
a moment).

Unless you have a embarrassingly parallel problem to begin with (which
music typesetting is not), lots of parallelism only buys you
synchronization overhead, both lock contention at run-time, and the
overhead of having to write race-condition-free parallel code.

Note that lilypond is embarassingly parallel at the file level, so for
the regression test, we already distribute the files on as many CPUs
as we have available.

Yes, but the problem that you have there is that it requires the user to
separate out the projects manually using some kind of build system like Make. I
don't see why in principle Lilypond shouldn't be able to work out those
independent jobs itself -- essentially any elements separated by a page break
can be handled as a separate job, and there must be other further optimizations
available.

For example, if you've got a 100-page full orchestral score, is it really
appropriate to do a global optimization of the whole thing? How mutually
dependent, really, are the first and last pages? Isn't it possible to break the
work up into manageable smaller units even in the case that it's 100 pages of
continuous music?

It's not just about how many cores you can use, in fact that's probably a minor
issue compared to:

-- Largest possible memory consumption and/or calculation size. Is it
capped or does it scale in an unlimited way with score size?

-- Scale of rebuild process relative to size of change made. Your
worst-case scenario here is probably still going to be a full rebuild,
but can you minimize the _expected_ rebuild size?

I remember well trying to build Valentin's opera, and building even one part of
it took a huge amount of both time and memory. I don't want to think about the
difficulty of _editing_ that score.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Paralellizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shuts down]

2012-08-10 Thread David Kastrup

Joseph Rushton Wakeling  writes:

> For example, if you've got a 100-page full orchestral score, is it
> really appropriate to do a global optimization of the whole thing?

Sure.

> How mutually dependent, really, are the first and last pages?

Not much, usually.  And that's what linear programming is usually going
to arrive at.

> Isn't it possible to break the work up into manageable smaller units
> even in the case that it's 100 pages of continuous music?

Linear programming breaks up the work into manageable smaller units.
The units are not separate bunches of pages but rather independent
breakpoint sequences.

> It's not just about how many cores you can use, in fact that's
> probably a minor issue compared to:
>
> -- Largest possible memory consumption and/or calculation size.  Is it
>capped or does it scale in an unlimited way with score size?

Scales with score size.  It would be challenging to create output
on-the-fly, namely whenever all optimum breakpoint sequences share
common starting sequences, and it would depend on the absence of
forward-references (like page references and stuff).

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Parallelizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shuts down]


On 10/08/12 11:56, David Kastrup wrote:

Isn't it possible to break the work up into manageable smaller units
even in the case that it's 100 pages of continuous music?


Linear programming breaks up the work into manageable smaller units.
The units are not separate bunches of pages but rather independent
breakpoint sequences.


... but if I understand right, that doesn't put a cap on overall memory 
consumption during the process?  (I.e. the peak amount of memory that will be 
used at any one time?)



It's not just about how many cores you can use, in fact that's
probably a minor issue compared to:

 -- Largest possible memory consumption and/or calculation size.  Is it
capped or does it scale in an unlimited way with score size?


Scales with score size.  It would be challenging to create output
on-the-fly, namely whenever all optimum breakpoint sequences share
common starting sequences, and it would depend on the absence of
forward-references (like page references and stuff).


So what do you think about the potential of an algorithm going something like 
this:

(1) Read in enough bars of music to take up a little over 2 pages [you can
presumably do a rough estimate of the width and height of bars and staff
systems on the fly].

(2) Engrave that music.  Keep the first page written.

(3) If the music is completely engraved, keep the second page as well, and
stop.  Otherwise, rewind to the start of the second page and return
to step (1), reading and engraving from this new start point.

So basically you're doing: engrave pp. 1 & 2, keep page 1; engrave pp. 2 & 3, 
keep page 2; engrave pp. 3 & 4, keep page 3; 


You could generalize this to engraving N+1 pages (N >= 1) at a time and keeping 
the first N pages written.


That should keep a firm cap on calculation size and memory consumption, as you'd 
only ever be engraving N+1 pages at a time.  It would probably be slower for 
small scores, but would make it possible to build scores of any size with a 
constant memory footprint.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Parallelizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shuts down]

2012-08-10 Thread David Kastrup

Joseph Rushton Wakeling  writes:

> So what do you think about the potential of an algorithm going something like 
> this:
>
> (1) Read in enough bars of music to take up a little over 2 pages [you can
> presumably do a rough estimate of the width and height of bars and 
> staff
> systems on the fly].
>
> (2) Engrave that music.  Keep the first page written.
>
> (3) If the music is completely engraved, keep the second page as well, and
> stop.  Otherwise, rewind to the start of the second page and return
> to step (1), reading and engraving from this new start point.
>
> So basically you're doing: engrave pp. 1 & 2, keep page 1; engrave
> pp. 2 & 3, keep page 2; engrave pp. 3 & 4, keep page 3; 
>
> You could generalize this to engraving N+1 pages (N >= 1) at a time
> and keeping the first N pages written.
>
> That should keep a firm cap on calculation size and memory
> consumption, as you'd only ever be engraving N+1 pages at a time.  It
> would probably be slower for small scores, but would make it possible
> to build scores of any size with a constant memory footprint.

I think we have enough real problems without inventing artificial
challenges.

-- 
David Kastrup


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Error in 2.14 Documentation? Snippet Subdividing beams lily-4289b33e.ly

2012-08-10 Thread Tiresia GIUNO

On Fri, 10 Aug 2012 09:57:24 +0200
Tiresia GIUNO  wrote:
> In the Notation Reference, the first Snippet "Subdividing beams" of
> the Section "1.2.4 Beams, Setting automatic beam behavior"
> 
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/Documentation/notation/beams#setting-automatic-beam-behavior
> 
> seems to me containing an error. This is the Snippet:
> 
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.14/Documentation/49/lily-4289b33e.ly
> 
> I believe that, according to the displayed music, the Code should look
> like this:
> 
> %% START %%
> \relative c'' {
>   c32[ c c c c c c c]
>   \set subdivideBeams = ##t
>   c32[ c c c c c c c]
> 
>   % Set beam sub-group length to an eighth note
>   \set baseMoment = #(ly:make-moment 1 8)
>   \set beatStructure = #'(4 4 4 4)
>   c32[ c c c c c c c]
> 
>   % Set beam sub-group length to a sixteenth note
>   \set baseMoment = #(ly:make-moment 1 16)
>   \set beatStructure = #'(2 2 2 2)
>   c32[ c c c c c c c]
> }
> %% END %%
> 
> 
> i.e. with the beatStructure for the third Beat set to (4 4 4 4)
> instead of (2 2 2 2) as stated there. The opposite for the last Beat.
>  
> Am I misunderstanding the text or is there a Bug?
> 
> On the other hand, working on this code I noticed that, in order to
> obtain the intended result, it's enough to set baseMoment and
> that setting beatStructure has no influence on the result. Or am I
> also here misunderstanding the code?
> 
> TG 

Don't mind, the Documentation is correct! I got confused trying to
understand how time managing works in LP. Sorry!
TG
 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Parallelizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shuts down]


On 10/08/12 12:48, David Kastrup wrote:

I think we have enough real problems without inventing artificial
challenges.


I accept that there are bigger short-term concerns -- but my experience trying 
to build the score of Valentin's opera is that being able to cap maximum memory 
consumption or calculation size isn't something artificial.  It's a real 
challenge to Lilypond's usability.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Sibelius to LilyPond (Was: Sibelius Software UK office shuts down)

2012-08-10 Thread Johan Vromans

David Kastrup  writes:

> That sounds like we could at least link to it.  Since it requires
> proprietary software for running, I don't think it makes sense to host
> or even maintain it as part of LilyPond, but pointing to it should not
> be a problem.

I've put the Sib2Ly tools on GitHub:

https://github.com/sciurius/sib2ly.git

SIB2LY is developed by Kirill Sidorov and licensed under the GPL.
Kirill has changed priorities and will not actively maintain the
program for the time being.

I use SIB2LY on a regular base, and decided to make Kirill's work
available via GitHub.

The GitHub repo has two branches: master and alpha. The master branch
is what I use and made some modifications to. It is fairly stable and
does a lot of good and useful work.

The alpha branch contains the latest modifications by Kirill and is
very unstable, i.e., it doesn't work. I may have a look at his
modifications and incorporate them in the master branch.

Introductionary notice (by Kirill Sidorov):

SIB2LY is a tool for exporting Sibelius scores and translating them into
the language of LilyPond for typesetting the most beautiful scores.
While LilyPond is by far the best tool today to typeset professionally
looking music, many musicians still find the non-WYSIWYG way of editing
intimidating. Sibelius, being one of the few non-evil WYSIWIG notation
editors, is appealing to musicians as it allows a convenient way of
editing scores and seeing them at the same time. While I remain an
advocate of non-WISYWIG typesetting of texts (forever a user of LaTeX),
typesetting music, essentially a graphical language, is harder this way.
Therefore, a combination of the two paradigms -- WISIWYG for entering
and editing of music and non-WYSIWYG approach to final tuning and
camera-ready typesetting -- is attractive. Hence `sib2ly`.

With `sib2ly`, the conversion (or rather, translation) is a two-stage
process. First, one runs an export plugin in Sibelius. The plugin is
minimalistic in design and simply reads through all the staves in the
score and dumps all the score objects, along with meta-data such as
title, composer, etc., into an .xml file. One then runs the `sib2ly`
_interpreter tool_ on the generated .xml dump to finally produce a
LilyPond source. The rationale for this is as follows. The original
attempt at `sib2ly` was in the form of a self-contained plugin that
would do all the translation. However, as many new features were added,
and as more and more special cases were dealt with, the `sib2ly` plugin
grew into monstrosity, got unmanageable, unmaintainable, slow, and
started tu run into limitations of the ManuScript language. Soon it
became clear that a different approach is required to handle all the
complexities of the language of music. Therefore, the `sib2ly` _suite_
now consists of a dumb Sibelius plugin, and an intelligent interpreter
that translates the music into the target LilyPond language. This
ensures better extensibility and maintainability.

-- Johan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

end-of-line-visible does not work


Hi all!

I am trying to write a Da Capo mark at the end of a score, but 
#end-of-line-visible option seems not to work.
It is quite hard to send the whole score (it has some includes), but 
here is the Main file:


\version "2.15.42"

\include "def-reprises.ly"

debut = {

\tempo "Vivace"

\time 4/4

\set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)

\key b \minor

}

structure = {

\repeat volta 2 {

s1*3

}

\alternative {

{ s1 } { s1 }

}

\repeat volta 2 {

s1*7

}

s1*64

\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility = 
#end-of-line-visible


\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT

\mark \markup { \smaller "D.C. al Fine" }

}

\score {

\new StaffGroup

<<

\new Staff {

\debut

<< \structure

\include "flauto.ly" >>

}

\new Staff {

\debut

\include "violone.ly"

}

>>

}


If I comment the '\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility 
= #end-of-line-visible' line, I have my Da Capo mark at the beginning of 
the bar.


Thanks in advance for your help!

L.C.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Paralellizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shutsdown]

- Original Message - 
From: "Joseph Rushton Wakeling" 

To: 
Cc: ; "Han-Wen Nienhuys" 
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 11:46 AM
Subject: Paralellizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office 
shutsdown]

Yes, but the problem that you have there is that it requires the user to 
separate out the projects manually using some kind of build system like 
Make.  I don't see why in principle Lilypond shouldn't be able to work out 
those independent jobs itself -- essentially any elements separated by a 
page break can be handled as a separate job, and there must be other 
further optimizations available.

If you could break it up into 8 chunks, you could use all 8 cores in a quad 
core system using -djob-count.  No need to use make.

--
Phil Holmes 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: end-of-line-visible does not work

Can you reduce the score to a small one that you can send, which will compile 
independently?  That way we can try to see what you're doing more easily.

--
Phil Holmes

  - Original Message - 
  From: Loïc Chahine 
  To: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:28 PM
  Subject: end-of-line-visible does not work

  Hi all!

  I am trying to write a Da Capo mark at the end of a score, but 
#end-of-line-visible option seems not to work.
  It is quite hard to send the whole score (it has some includes), but here is 
the Main file:

  \version "2.15.42"

  \include "def-reprises.ly"

  debut = {

  \tempo "Vivace"

  \time 4/4

  \set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)

  \key b \minor

  }

  structure = {

  \repeat volta 2 {

  s1*3

  }

  \alternative {

  { s1 } { s1 }

  }

  \repeat volta 2 {

  s1*7

  }

  s1*64

  \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility = #end-of-line-visible

  \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT

  \mark \markup { \smaller "D.C. al Fine" }

  }

  \score {

  \new StaffGroup

  <<

  \new Staff {

  \debut

  << \structure

  \include "flauto.ly" >>

  }

  \new Staff {

  \debut

  \include "violone.ly"

  }

  >>

  }

  If I comment the '\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility = 
#end-of-line-visible' line, I have my Da Capo mark at the beginning of the bar.

  Thanks in advance for your help!

  L.C.

--

  ___
  lilypond-user mailing list
  lilypond-user@gnu.org
  https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: end-of-line-visible does not work


I tried with another score and it works, that's weird.
I can send the two included files, actually there are only two (I am 
used to work with more). Here they are, with the main score. I commented 
the 'include "def-reprises.ly' line: it is not useful in this score. 
That way, you should be able to compile the score.
Let me know if that seems a good way to help or if I should do something 
more tiny.

L.C.

Le 10/08/12 15:32, Phil Holmes a écrit :
Can you reduce the score to a small one that you can send, which will 
compile independently?  That way we can try to see what you're doing 
more easily.


--
Phil Holmes

- Original Message -
*From:* Loïc Chahine 
*To:* lilypond-user@gnu.org 
*Sent:* Friday, August 10, 2012 2:28 PM
*Subject:* end-of-line-visible does not work

Hi all!

I am trying to write a Da Capo mark at the end of a score, but
#end-of-line-visible option seems not to work.
It is quite hard to send the whole score (it has some includes),
but here is the Main file:

\version "2.15.42"

\include "def-reprises.ly"

debut = {

\tempo "Vivace"

\time 4/4

\set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)

\key b \minor

}

structure = {

\repeat volta 2 {

s1*3

}

\alternative {

{ s1 } { s1 }

}

\repeat volta 2 {

s1*7

}

s1*64

\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility =
#end-of-line-visible

\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT

\mark \markup { \smaller "D.C. al Fine" }

}

\score {

\new StaffGroup

<<

\new Staff {

\debut

<< \structure

\include "flauto.ly" >>

}

\new Staff {

\debut

\include "violone.ly"

}

>>

}


If I comment the '\once \override Score.RehearsalMark
#'break-visibility = #end-of-line-visible' line, I have my Da Capo
mark at the beginning of the bar.

Thanks in advance for your help!

L.C.



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



\relative f'' {
  fis8 d16 e fis8 b, g'4 e |
  fis8 d16 e fis8 b, e4 cis |
  d8 cis16 d e8 cis d cis16 d e8 cis |
  \repeat unfold 2 {
d4 e-\trill fis r |
  }
  
  r8 cis fis4 r8 cis fis, cis' |
  d fis b4 r8 fis b, fis' |
  g b, e4 r8 b gis b |
  cis e a4 r8 e a, e' |
  fis8 e16 fis g8 e fis e16 fis g8 e |
  fis16 g fis g e fis e fis d e d e cis d cis d |
  e8 d16 cis cis8. b16 b4-\fermata r4 |
  
  b'16( cis b) fis fis( g fis) d d( e d) b b( cis b) fis |
  b4 cis-\trill d r8 d |
  cis4 e ais, r8 cis |
  fis16( g fis) d e( fis e) cis d( e d) b d( e d) b |
  e( fis e) cis d( e d) b cis( d cis) a cis( d cis) a |
  d( e d) b cis( d cis) a b( cis b) gis b( cis b) gis |
  cis( d cis) a b( cis b) gis a( b a) fis cis'( d cis) a |
  a'4 r r2 |
  r r8 cis, a fis |
  r2 r8 gis' eis cis |
  r4 r8 cis' cis fis, r fis |
  fis b, r8 b' b e, r e |
  e a, r a' a a, r4 |
  fis'4 a d, r8 d |
  g4 b e, r8 fis |
  g2~ g8 b a g |
  fis fis16 a e4 fis8 fis16 d e8 a, |
  a' fis16 g a8 d, b'4 g-\trill |
  a8 fis16 g a8 d, g4 e-\trill |
  fis8 e16 fis g8 e fis8 e16 fis g8 e |
  fis8. g16 e8. d16 d4 r |
  \repeat unfold 2 {
fis8 d16 e fis8 b, g'4 e |
fis8 d16 e fis8 b, e4 cis |
d8 cis16 d e8 cis d cis16 d e8 cis |
d4 e-\trill fis r |
  }
  \repeat unfold 2 {
r8 cis fis4 r8 cis fis, cis' |
d fis b4 r8 fis b, fis' |
g b, e4 r8 b gis b |
cis e a4 r8 e a, e' |
fis e16 fis g8 e fis e16 fis g8 e |
fis16 g fis g e fis e fis d e d e cis d cis d |
e8 d16 cis cis8. b16 b4 r |
  }
  fis'8.( g16) fis8.( g16) fis4 r8 g |
  fis8.( g16) \times 2/3 { a8( g fis) } g4 r8 e |
  c'8.( b16) a8.( g16) \times 2/3 { fis8( g a) a( g fis) } |
  b8.( a16) g8.( fis16) \times 2/3 { e8( fis g) g fis e } |
  a1~ |
  a8. fis16 g8. a16 fis4. g8 |
  g4 r d8 b r4 |
  r2 e8 cis r4 |
  d8 d, r4 d'8 d, r4 |
  e'8 e, r4 e'8 e, r4 |
  d'8. cis16 b8. a16 \times 2/3 { gis8( a b) b( a gis) } |
  e'4 r8 fis cis4( b8.) a16 |
  a4~ a16 b a b cis8.( d16) cis8.( d16) |
  cis4 r8 d cis8. d16 \times 2/3 { e8( e cis) } |
  d4 r8 d a'8. b16 a8. b16 |
  \times 2/3 { a8( g fis) a( g fis) } g8.( a16) g8.( a16) |
  \times 2/3 { g8( fis e) g( fis e) } fis8.( g16) fis8.( g16) |
  \times 2/3 { fis8( e d) fis( e d) } e8.( fis16) e8.( fis16) |
  \times 2/3 { e8( d cis) e( d cis) } d8. e16 d8. e16 |
  \times 2/3 { cis8 d e e d cis } d4 r8 d |
  \times 2/3 { cis8( d e) e( d cis) } d2~ |
  d8. e16 d8. e16 cis4 r |
}\relative c {
  \clef bass
  b4 r8 b' e,4 a |
  d, r8 g e4 fis |
  b, e8 fis b,4 e8 fis |
  b4 g fis8 fis16 gis ais8 fis |
  b4 g fis4 r |
  
  fis,4 r fis r |
  b r b r |
  e r e r |
  a, r a r |
  d g8 a d,4 g8 a |
  d, d e fis b, d fis fis, |
  e

Re: Paralellizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shutsdown]


On 10/08/12 14:31, Phil Holmes wrote:

If you could break it up into 8 chunks, you could use all 8 cores in a quad core
system using -djob-count.  No need to use make.


What counts as a "chunk" for the -djob-count option?  It's not clear from the 
2.15 usage manual.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Writing a repeated rhythm


Hi all!

I am trying to find a function to simplify repeated rhythm writing. I 
have a part with many bars like:


r8 c16( c  c c c c) r8 d16( d  d d d d)

and I think it would be easier to write something like:

\myRh { c d }

I found some Snippets, like this one:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=302
or this one:
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=465

But they seem not to work with 2.15.42, and I am not able to update them.

Thanks in advance for your help!
L.C.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Paralellizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office shutsdown]

- Original Message - 
From: "Joseph Rushton Wakeling" 

To: "Phil Holmes" 
Cc: ; ; "Han-Wen Nienhuys" 


Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Paralellizing Lilypond [was: Re: Sibelius Software UK office 
shutsdown]




On 10/08/12 14:31, Phil Holmes wrote:
If you could break it up into 8 chunks, you could use all 8 cores in a 
quad core

system using -djob-count.  No need to use make.


What counts as a "chunk" for the -djob-count option?  It's not clear from 
the 2.15 usage manual.


I believe it would be a compilable file.

--
Phil Holmes 



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: end-of-line-visible does not work

How about:

  s1*64
  s2. s8. s16
  ^\markup { \right-align "D.C. al Fine" }


--
Phil Holmes


  - Original Message - 
  From: Loïc Chahine 
  To: Phil Holmes 
  Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:37 PM
  Subject: Re: end-of-line-visible does not work


  I tried with another score and it works, that's weird.
  I can send the two included files, actually there are only two (I am used to 
work with more). Here they are, with the main score. I commented the 'include 
"def-reprises.ly' line: it is not useful in this score. That way, you should be 
able to compile the score.
  Let me know if that seems a good way to help or if I should do something more 
tiny.
  L.C.

  Le 10/08/12 15:32, Phil Holmes a écrit :

Can you reduce the score to a small one that you can send, which will 
compile independently?  That way we can try to see what you're doing more 
easily.

--
Phil Holmes


  - Original Message - 
  From: Loïc Chahine 
  To: lilypond-user@gnu.org 
  Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:28 PM
  Subject: end-of-line-visible does not work


  Hi all!

  I am trying to write a Da Capo mark at the end of a score, but 
#end-of-line-visible option seems not to work.
  It is quite hard to send the whole score (it has some includes), but here 
is the Main file:


  \version "2.15.42"

  \include "def-reprises.ly"

  debut = {

  \tempo "Vivace"

  \time 4/4

  \set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)

  \key b \minor

  }

  structure = {

  \repeat volta 2 {

  s1*3

  }

  \alternative {

  { s1 } { s1 }

  }

  \repeat volta 2 {

  s1*7

  }

  s1*64

  \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility = 
#end-of-line-visible

  \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT

  \mark \markup { \smaller "D.C. al Fine" }

  }

  \score {

  \new StaffGroup

  <<

  \new Staff {

  \debut

  << \structure

  \include "flauto.ly" >>

  }

  \new Staff {

  \debut

  \include "violone.ly"

  }

  >>

  }



  If I comment the '\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility 
= #end-of-line-visible' line, I have my Da Capo mark at the beginning of the 
bar.



  Thanks in advance for your help!


  L.C.






--
  ___
  lilypond-user mailing list
  lilypond-user@gnu.org
  https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Writing a repeated rhythm

2012-08-10 Thread David Kastrup

Loïc Chahine  writes:

> Hi all!
>
> I am trying to find a function to simplify repeated rhythm writing. I
> have a part with many bars like:
>
> r8 c16( c  c c c c) r8 d16( d  d d d d)
>
> and I think it would be easier to write something like:
>
> \myRh { c d }
>
> I found some Snippets, like this one: 
> http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=302
> or this one:
> http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=465
>
> But they seem not to work with 2.15.42, and I am not able to update
> them.

http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/snippets/pitches#pitches-creating-a-sequence-of-notes-on-various-pitches>

-- 
David Kastrup


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Sibelius to LilyPond

2012-08-10 Thread John Link


On Aug 10, 2012, at 8:08 AM, Johan Vromans wrote:

> David Kastrup  writes:
> 
>> That sounds like we could at least link to it.  Since it requires
>> proprietary software for running, I don't think it makes sense to host
>> or even maintain it as part of LilyPond, but pointing to it should not
>> be a problem.
> 
> I've put the Sib2Ly tools on GitHub:
> 
> https://github.com/sciurius/sib2ly.git

Does Sib2Ly work on a Mac?

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Sibelius to LilyPond

2012-08-10 Thread Johan Vromans

John Link  writes:

>> https://github.com/sciurius/sib2ly.git
>
> Does Sib2Ly work on a Mac?

Assuming you have Ruby on the Mac, all that sib2ly does is
text-processing a XML file into a LilyPond file. That should not be
problematic, I guess.

-- Johan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: end-of-line-visible does not work

2012-08-10 Thread Thomas Morley

2012/8/10 Phil Holmes :
> How about:
>
>   s1*64
>   s2. s8. s16
>   ^\markup { \right-align "D.C. al Fine" }
>
> --
> Phil Holmes
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Loïc Chahine
> To: Phil Holmes
> Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:37 PM
> Subject: Re: end-of-line-visible does not work
>
> I tried with another score and it works, that’s weird.
> I can send the two included files, actually there are only two (I am used to
> work with more). Here they are, with the main score. I commented the
> ‘include "def-reprises.ly’ line: it is not useful in this score. That way,
> you should be able to compile the score.
> Let me know if that seems a good way to help or if I should do something
> more tiny.
> L.C.
>
> Le 10/08/12 15:32, Phil Holmes a écrit :
>
> Can you reduce the score to a small one that you can send, which will
> compile independently?  That way we can try to see what you're doing more
> easily.
>
> --
> Phil Holmes
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Loïc Chahine
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2012 2:28 PM
> Subject: end-of-line-visible does not work
>
> Hi all!
>
> I am trying to write a Da Capo mark at the end of a score, but
> #end-of-line-visible option seems not to work.
> It is quite hard to send the whole score (it has some includes), but here is
> the Main file:
>
> \version "2.15.42"
>
> \include "def-reprises.ly"
>
> debut = {
>
> \tempo "Vivace"
>
> \time 4/4
>
> \set tupletSpannerDuration = #(ly:make-moment 1 4)
>
> \key b \minor
>
> }
>
> structure = {
>
> \repeat volta 2 {
>
> s1*3
>
> }
>
> \alternative {
>
> { s1 } { s1 }
>
> }
>
> \repeat volta 2 {
>
> s1*7
>
> }
>
> s1*64
>
> \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility =
> #end-of-line-visible
>
> \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT
>
> \mark \markup { \smaller "D.C. al Fine" }
>
> }
>
> \score {
>
> \new StaffGroup
>
> <<
>
> \new Staff {
>
> \debut
>
> << \structure
>
> \include "flauto.ly" >>
>
> }
>
> \new Staff {
>
> \debut
>
> \include "violone.ly"
>
> }
>
>>>
>
> }
>
>
> If I comment the ‘\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility =
> #end-of-line-visible’ line, I have my Da Capo mark at the beginning of the
> bar.
>
> Thanks in advance for your help!
>
> L.C.
>
>
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>

Hi,

it's a simple counting-mistake in `structure' of score.ly.

Try:

structure = {
  \repeat volta 2 {
s1*3
  }
  \alternative {
{ s1 } { s1 }
  }
  \repeat volta 2 {
s1*7
  }
  s1*65  %<=
  \once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility = #end-of-line-visible
\once \override Score.RehearsalMark #'self-alignment-X = #RIGHT
\mark \markup { \smaller "D.C. al Fine" }
}



HTH,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: end-of-line-visible does not work

2012-08-10 Thread eluze

I think it's a good idea to set 

\override Score.RehearsalMark #'break-visibility = #all-visible

for debugging purposes

Eluze



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/end-of-line-visible-does-not-work-tp130421p130446.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: In-C style Typesetting?

2012-08-10 Thread Marc Hohl


Am 08.08.2012 17:30, schrieb Gabriel Taubman:

Hi Ole,
Thanks for the help!  That looks like it almost does the trick.  If I 
add more bars though, then sometimes it wraps a measure strangely. 
 See attached.


If I manually insert a \break, then that can fix it, but I was hoping 
to not need to manually insert breaks since this .ly files will be 
autogenerated.  Do you have any ideas for how to get around that?



Hi Gabriel,

with the current bar line machanism, a workaround is a bit clumsy but 
doable.

See the attached file, I hope, it serves your needs.

Regards,

Marc

Thanks again!  I really appreciate the help.
Gabe

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, ole > wrote:


maybe this helps?

ole

[siehe angehängte Datei: stop&start_staff.ly
]   [siehe angehängte Datei: Screenshot
2012-08-08 um 16.47.50.jpg]

x
www.oleschmidt.info 
x

Am 08.08.2012 um 16:01 schrieb Gabe Taubman:

> Hi Lilypond Folks!
> I was wondering if anybody has tips for typesetting measures in
the style of
> Terry Riley's "In C" such as:
> http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_tkm9v4opNG8/SxN7-
>

mizljI/DNI/uhvaeoUD0vY/s1600/Terry%20Riley%20In%20C%20full%20score.jpg
>
> I think I can use cadenza mode to have the arbitrary number of
beats per
> measure, but I'm not sure how to break the measures apart like that.
>
> Does anyone have any tips?
>
> Thanks!
> Gabe
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org 
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


#(define (dotted-line-break grob)
   (let ((dir (ly:item-break-dir grob)))

 (if (= dir CENTER)
":"
#f)))

#(define (my-calc-glyph-name grob)
  (let ((glyph (ly:grob-property grob 'glyph)))

(if (string=? glyph ":")
(dotted-line-break grob)
(bar-line::calc-glyph-name grob



\layout {
  \context {
\Staff
\remove "Time_signature_engraver"
  }
}

musick = \relative c' {
\override Staff.BarLine #'glyph-name = #my-calc-glyph-name
\stopStaff

s4

\startStaff

\set Timing.defaultBarType = ""
\bar ":"
\repeat unfold 3 { \stemDown \appoggiatura c8 \stemNeutral e4 }
\bar ":"
\stopStaff

s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
\stemDown \appoggiatura c8 \stemNeutral e8 f e4
\bar ":"
\stopStaff

s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
r8 e f[ e]
\bar ":"
\stopStaff

%s4
%\startStaff
%\bar ":"
%r1 e f g2 a b f1
%\bar ":"
%\stopStaff

s4
\startStaff
\bar ":"
r8 e f[ g]
\bar ":"
\stopStaff

s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
e8 f g r
\bar ":"
\stopStaff

s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
e8 f g r
\bar ":"
\stopStaff

s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
e8 f g r
\bar ":"
\stopStaff
s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
e8 f g r
\bar ":"
\stopStaff
s4

\startStaff
\bar ":"
e8 f g r
% at the end of the piece, revert the settings to
% enable the dotted bar line at the end of the line.
\revert Staff.BarLine #'glyph-name
\bar ":"
\stopStaff
}

\score { \musick }

\header {
  title = "2012-08-18 12:56:21 PM"
  tagline = ""  % removed
}___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: end-of-line-visible does not work