Re: Simpler lyric notation

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
> No, what you're seeing is legacy stuff. If you're willing to spend > some time coding, I'll gladly take on patches that fix this. If you can give me some pointers, I will. Since I don't know Python, barely know C++ (but I know C very well) nor Scheme (but I know elisp quite well) I may be a bit

Simpler lyric notation

2004-02-23 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Am I missing something important about lyric typesetting? If not, the > above scheme would seem to be very easy to implement, and save quite a lot > of typing. No, what you're seeing is legacy stuff. If you're willing to spend some time coding, I'll gladly take on patch

Simpler lyric notation

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
I've just been entering lyrics for a song, and I've come up with a puzzle: what is the point of -- and __ ? As far as I can see, there should be a -- between every pair of syllables in a word, and a __ at the end of every word. Hyphen (-) at the end of a syllable is unnecessary AFAICS. Of course,

Re: Unable to customize LilyPond variables

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 00:25:55 +0100 (CET) Reuben Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I'm not sure who's currently responsible for lilypond-indent.el, so I'm > > sending this to the list and to Heikki, who seems to be the main > > author. > > > > Variables such as LilyPond-indent-level claim to

Re: Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
> No, no, no! I don't think that it is a good idea to have two different > default values for a property such as raggedright: if you do not specify a > \paper block at all, the default would be ##t, but if you say \paper{}, > the default would be ##f. This would be totally confusing for a new > l

Re: Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Juergen Reuter
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > On Monday 23 February 2004 11.59, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > The manual says that \paper{} is required and several examples have an > > > > empty \paper{}, but this doesn't seem (fro

Re: Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
> Funny. > > I always have to add > > \paper{ raggedright = ##t } But only if you want raggedright! > Maybe that's a sensible solution? Having \paper{}/\midi{} correspond to > \paper { raggedright = ##t } ? But that would have confused me when I typeset a short score without a \paper declarati

Re: Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Erik Sandberg
On Monday 23 February 2004 11.59, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > The manual says that \paper{} is required and several examples have an > > empty \paper{}, but this doesn't seem (from experience) to be true in > > 2.1.25 any more. Is this the manual being out of date, or Li

Re: Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > On Monday 23 February 2004 11.59, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > The manual says that \paper{} is required and several examples have an > > > empty \paper{}, but this doesn't seem (from experience) to be true in > > > 2.1.25 any more. Is this

Re: Source specials

2004-02-23 Thread Mats Bengtsson
See the section on Point and Click in the reference manual! /Mats Reuben Thomas wrote: I can't find any evidence that LilyPond supports source \specials for the ability to click on a place in a DVI score and be taken to the source (as with LaTeX) but it seems to me this ought to be fairly strai

Source specials

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
I can't find any evidence that LilyPond supports source \specials for the ability to click on a place in a DVI score and be taken to the source (as with LaTeX) but it seems to me this ought to be fairly straightforward to implement. Is there any interest in this? -- http://www.mupsych.org/~rrt/ |

Re: Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Reuben Thomas
> The default is to supply a \paper{} declaration if no output (paper, > midi) is specified. Perhaps this default should be changed? I'm happy with the default as it fits the common case. I'd just it to be documented (as otherwise the docs are a bit confusing). -- http://www.mupsych.org/~rrt/ |

Is \paper{} needed?

2004-02-23 Thread Han-Wen Nienhuys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > The manual says that \paper{} is required and several examples have an > empty \paper{}, but this doesn't seem (from experience) to be true in > 2.1.25 any more. Is this the manual being out of date, or LilyPond being > over-lenient? The default is to supply a \paper{}

RE: 2.1.25 under Cygwin

2004-02-23 Thread Bertalan Fodor
Isn't it the same problem as http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2004-02/msg00236.html? Bert ___ Lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel