On Sunday 04 November 2007, Erik Sandberg wrote:
> On Monday 29 October 2007, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > For instance, the following score
> > >
> > > \score { \new Voice { c1 } }
> > >
> > > segfaults.
> >
> > Bug report, please. LilyPond should abort, and never segfault.
>
> It shouldn't be too
On Monday 29 October 2007, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > For instance, the following score
> >
> > \score { \new Voice { c1 } }
> >
> > segfaults.
>
> Bug report, please. LilyPond should abort, and never segfault.
It shouldn't be too difficult to just allow cyclic context-definition graphs
instead o
Rune Zedeler daimi.au.dk> writes:
> at top of your program, then StaffGroups may contain StaffGroups - and
> hence you can do arbitrary nesting of StaffGroups. But it is a very
> dangerous thing to do - because it contains a cycle. For instance, the
> following score
>
> \score { \new Voice {
> For instance, the following score
>
> \score { \new Voice { c1 } }
>
> segfaults.
Bug report, please. LilyPond should abort, and never segfault.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listi
Reinhold Kainhofer skrev:
From a user's POV, even requiring InnerStaffGroup instead of StaffGroup is not
obvious.
I agree.
Actually, you might be able to circumvent the problems with the circular
references.
If you insert
\layout {
\context {
\StaffGroup
\accepts "StaffGroup"
}
Am Sonntag, 28. Oktober 2007 schrieb Rune Zedeler:
> Reinhold Kainhofer skrev:
> > Hi,
> > I understand that for nested StaffGroups, one needs to use
> > InnerStaffGroup for the inner groups, however, this seems to add only one
> > more possible level to the hierarchy. Attached is an example where
Reinhold Kainhofer skrev:
Hi,
I understand that for nested StaffGroups, one needs to use InnerStaffGroup for
the inner groups, however, this seems to add only one more possible level to
the hierarchy. Attached is an example where the innermost InnerStaffGroup is
not shown in the correct hierar
Hi,
I understand that for nested StaffGroups, one needs to use InnerStaffGroup for
the inner groups, however, this seems to add only one more possible level to
the hierarchy. Attached is an example where the innermost InnerStaffGroup is
not shown in the correct hierarchy, but rather after the en
