on 2013-05-17 at 01:21 Thomas Morley wrote:
> Rereading the code I'm not convinced about my brilliance:
well, i was referring to the results, which seem to be perfect indeed.
of course i can't evaluate the coding style...
___
lilypond-user mailing
2013/5/17 luis jure :
>
> on 2013-05-17 at 00:40 Thomas Morley wrote:
>
>> Meanwhile you may want to use the function below.
>> Comments in code, if something isn't clear, shout.
>
> brilliant, as always...
Rereading the code I'm not convinced about my brilliance:
Please delete `Score.' from.
\o
on 2013-05-17 at 00:40 Thomas Morley wrote:
> Meanwhile you may want to use the function below.
> Comments in code, if something isn't clear, shout.
brilliant, as always...
thank you very much! i can't say i understand the code, but it works
flawlessly. it resulted to be a more complicated prob
2013/5/16 luis jure :
>
> dear list,
>
> the output of the following code is shown in the first attached image:
>
> \version "2.17.17"
>
> \score {
> \new Voice \with {
> \remove "Forbid_line_break_engraver"
> \override Beam.breakable = ##t
> }
>
> \relative c'' {
>
dear list,
the output of the following code is shown in the first attached image:
\version "2.17.17"
\score {
\new Voice \with {
\remove "Forbid_line_break_engraver"
\override Beam.breakable = ##t
}
\relative c'' {
\repeat unfold 5 { c2. \repeat unfold 2
