> I have to think about this one. Currently, a rest is either handled
> by the beam code or by rest-collision. Mixing both leads to the
> beam-slope calculations being triggered too early, with disastrous
> results. For now, use pitched rests.
OK. My knowledge of lilypond's internals are too
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> % . The collision algorithm for multi-voice rests still has problems.
> %
> % This is a severe bug.
I have to think about this one. Currently, a rest is either handled
by the beam code or by rest-collision. Mixing both leads to the
beam-slope calculations being trig
> Both fixed in cvs. Please test.
Not really:
%
% This file shows a problem with rests in lilypond
% CVS 2004-02-14 00:47 MET.
%
% . Vertical rest positions in a multi-voice staff should go to the default
% position of a single-voice staff if a single voice has real rests,
% and the other voi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> % . Rests belonging to a voice in a multi-voice staff are incorrectly
> % moved to the default position. In the example below, bar two, the
> % quarter rests are positioned correctly while the eighth rests should
> % be moved up.
> %
> % This is a severe bug.
>
%
% This file shows a problem with rests in lilypond
% CVS 2004-02-09 14:09 MET.
%
% . Rests belonging to a voice in a multi-voice staff are incorrectly
% moved to the default position. In the example below, bar two, the
% quarter rests are positioned correctly while the eighth rests should
%
