W dniu 31 stycznia 2011 17:06 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
napisał:
> On 1/31/11 3:04 AM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
>> 2011/1/24 Phil Holmes
>>>
>>> If you use
>>>
>>> #(set-accidental-style 'modern-cautionary)
>>> then you get the parenthesised accidental automatically, as requested.
>>
>> Indeed, thank
On 2011-01-31 21:06, James Lowe wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Alexander Kobel
>> By the way: if you have { r2.. cis8( | c2!) r2 } all over the place,
>> and then there suddenly comes a { r2 cis2~ | cis2 r2 }, you'd expect an
>> additional sharp there too, don't you?
>
> Hmm...why
hello
-Original Message-
From: Alexander Kobel
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:14:23 +0100
To: Jan Warchoł
Cc: lilypond-user , bug-lilypond
, lilypond-devel
Subject: Re: Bug in ties over barlines
>By the way: if you have { r2.. cis8( | c2!) r2 } all over the place,
>and then
On 2011-01-31 11:04, Jan Warchoł wrote:
> [...] If the last note in the
> following example doesn't get a natural, it's *impossible* to tell
> that it's not another ces:
>
> ces'1~ | ces'
> ces'1( | c')
>
> It may be argued that the slur looks different than the tie, but it's
> not enough.
> I'm
On 1/31/11 3:04 AM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
> 2011/1/24 Phil Holmes
>>
>> If you use
>>
>> #(set-accidental-style 'modern-cautionary)
>> then you get the parenthesised accidental automatically, as requested.
>
> Indeed, thanks for the remainder.
> However, in my opinion it is necessary to *change
Hi,
sorry for the delay - i was busy making new flags for Lily.
2011/1/24 Phil Holmes
>
> - Original Message - From: "Jan Warchoł"
>
>
>> I don't agree. *Theoretically* accidental is not needed, but if it
>> would be omitted, how can you tell the difference between aes~ | aes
>> and ae
Thanks to everyone who responded and explained that Lilypond's
behaviour is correct, and that it is possible to use
set-accidental-style to get the behaviour I expected. I agree with
Janek that the theoretically correct behaviour can be confusing but I
understand better now the differences between
- Original Message -
From: "Jan Warchoł"
I don't agree. *Theoretically* accidental is not needed, but if it
would be omitted, how can you tell the difference between aes~ | aes
and aes( | a) ?
In my opinion accidental here is necessary (surely it may be
parenthesized). If it's necessar
2011/1/23 Xavier Scheuer :
> On 23 January 2011 23:09, Joseph Haig wrote:
>> {
>> \time 4/4
>> aes'1( a')
>> aes'~ aes'
>> aes'( aes')
>> }
>>
>> I believe that the first and third ties are displayed incorrectly.
>> Specifically, the first tie should have a natural in front of the
>>
On 23 January 2011 23:09, Joseph Haig wrote:
>
> I have (I believe) found a bug in Lilypond, and I am fairly sure what
> it is, but I would like to check with people who have better knowledge
> of music theory than I before I submit it to the bug list. In the
> following code:
>
> {
>\time 4/
On Jan 23, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Joseph Haig wrote:
> I have (I believe) found a bug in Lilypond, and I am fairly sure what
> it is, but I would like to check with people who have better knowledge
> of music theory than I before I submit it to the bug list. In the
> following code:
>
> {
>\tim
2011/1/23 Joseph Haig :
> I have (I believe) found a bug in Lilypond, and I am fairly sure what
> it is, but I would like to check with people who have better knowledge
> of music theory than I before I submit it to the bug list. In the
> following code:
>
> {
> \time 4/4
> aes'1( a')
> a
I have (I believe) found a bug in Lilypond, and I am fairly sure what
it is, but I would like to check with people who have better knowledge
of music theory than I before I submit it to the bug list. In the
following code:
{
\time 4/4
aes'1( a')
aes'~ aes'
aes'( aes')
}
I beli
13 matches
Mail list logo
