2017-04-11 22:34 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
> Here's how you can determine the widths of measures. Note that I've
> put everything on one line, so that the \once \override of the
> NoteHead gives access to every column in the score. You can adjust
> what alignment objects are used to gauge width
Am 14. April 2017 16:04:31 MESZ schrieb David Nalesnik
:
>On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 13.04.2017 um 16:48 schrieb David Nalesnik:
>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Urs Liska
>wrote:
Am 11.04.2017 um 21:04 schrieb tisimst:
On Tu
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
>
>
> Am 13.04.2017 um 16:48 schrieb David Nalesnik:
>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 11.04.2017 um 21:04 schrieb tisimst:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Urs Liska [via Lilypond] <[hidden email]>
>>
Am 13.04.2017 um 16:48 schrieb David Nalesnik:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
>>
>> Am 11.04.2017 um 21:04 schrieb tisimst:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Urs Liska [via Lilypond] <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Malte Meyn:
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
>
>
> Am 11.04.2017 um 21:04 schrieb tisimst:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Urs Liska [via Lilypond] <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>> >
>> > Am 11.04.2017 um 20:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
>>
atural measure widths)?
Well, it *would*. But it would require *two* compilations, one iwth
ragged-right to determine the widths and one without ragged-right to do
the actual engraving.
So, no, thanks, but it doesn't really help.
Best
Urs
>
> Best,
> Abraham
>
> ------
naturally. If then a
>>> line break changes and I know the natural width of the measures I can
>>> determine before compilation how many measures will fit on the *next*
>>> system.
>>>
>> But spacing depends on the sorts of durations present -- the most
>>
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 3:34 PM, David Nalesnik
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
>>
>>
>> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>>>
>>> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
So, is there any moment in the compilation process where the natural,
unstretc
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Urs Liska wrote:
>
>
> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>>
>> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
>>> So, is there any moment in the compilation process where the natural,
>>> unstretched length of a measure can be calculated? It doesn't have to be
l fit on the *next*
> system.
>
Does ragged-right = ##t not do what you want (at least in terms of
displaying the natural measure widths)?
Best,
Abraham
--
View this message in context:
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/natural-width-of-a-measure-tp202182p202185.html
Sent from the
Am 11.04.2017 um 20:46 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>
> Am 11.04.2017 um 20:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
>> So, is there any moment in the compilation process where the natural,
>> unstretched length of a measure can be calculated? It doesn't have to be
>> an easily-read property and can involve calculation, but
Am 11.04.2017 um 20:36 schrieb Urs Liska:
> So, is there any moment in the compilation process where the natural,
> unstretched length of a measure can be calculated? It doesn't have to be
> an easily-read property and can involve calculation, but actually the x
> position of the barlines would b
Hi,
is there any chance to retrieve the "natural width" of a measure after
typesetting but before the line is stretched to the full line width?
This is a rather long-term question, but it would be terrific if - upon
a compilation - I could retrieve a list of initial widths of each
mea
13 matches
Mail list logo
