On 2018-10-02 18:31, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi Maarten,
Why are there no numbers allowed in variable names?
\version "2.18.2"
"part1" = { c''4 4 4 4 }
\score {
\new Staff \"part1"
}
As for why you need the quotes… well, I’ll leave the explanation up to
more knowledgeable people than I.
On 2018-10-02 22:56, David Kastrup wrote:
Kieren MacMillan writes:
Hi Harm,
val = "foo"
<<
\new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
\new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val2 \val4 }
\new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val4 \val2 }
Your proposal would make it impossible.
Thanks for the examples. Obvio
Tom Campbell writes:
> I want vertical space to occur after a heading. But it seems that the
> following still puts the space before it, or am I going insane?
>
> #(define-markup-command (headerThree layout props text)
> (markup?)
> "Create a level 3 header"
> (interpret-markup layout props
>
Tom Campbell wrote:
I want vertical space to occur after a heading. But it seems that the
following still puts the space before it, or am I going insane?
See also
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2010-04/msg00057.html
Cheers,
Robin
Hi list,
I’m fiddling with lilypond-book and XeLaTeX for the first time and have a
little problem with a fragment that I want to include. I have a little
Lilypond file like this
\version "2.19.80"
\score {
\new Staff {
\clef treble
\key c \major
\time 12/8
% excerpt from Grieg P
Am 02.10.2018 um 11:42 schrieb Francesco Napoleoni:
Hi list,
I’m fiddling with lilypond-book and XeLaTeX for the first time and have a
little problem with a fragment that I want to include. I have a little
Lilypond file like this
\version "2.19.80"
\score {
\new Staff {
\clef treble
Hi Francesco
try this:
\version "2.19.80"
\score {
\new Staff {
\clef treble
\key c \major
\time 12/8
% excerpt from Grieg Piano sonata op. 7
\relative c'' {
% 16
4.->\ff -> -> ->\> |
% 17
s1.*0\! | % I had to add this measure to get the hairpin printed
}
On Sun 30 Sep 2018 at 16:49:13 (+0100), peter.gen...@sunscales.myzen.co.uk
wrote:
> Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 15:10:25 -0700
> From: Aaron Hill mailto:lilyp...@hillvisions.com>
> >
> > An Access Violation has nothing to do with permissions as was stated
> > earlier. This error code is specific to v
Why are there no numbers allowed in variable names? I like to have some
kind of descriptive name for parts of the scores that I make in
Lilypond, and not having the possibility to use numbers in a snippet
name is a bit awkward. I make do with Roman numerals to get partI,
partII, partIII, partIV
Hi Maarten,
> Why are there no numbers allowed in variable names?
\version "2.18.2"
"part1" = { c''4 4 4 4 }
\score {
\new Staff \"part1"
}
As for why you need the quotes… well, I’ll leave the explanation up to more
knowledgeable people than I.
Hope that helps!
Kieren.
I also miss numbers in variables and some kind of scoping for variables.
Immanuel
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 5:45 PM Maarten Deen wrote:
> Why are there no numbers allowed in variable names? I like to have some
> kind of descriptive name for parts of the scores that I make in
> Lilypond, and not ha
When I try to hide the fingering using either of these methods, I get a core
dump. It appears to be related to tuplets.
\version "2.18.2"
\score {
\tuplet 3/2 4 {
c'8 d'^1 c'
}
\layout {
% Assertion failure if either of the two lines below is uncommented:
% D
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi Maarten,
>
>> Why are there no numbers allowed in variable names?
>
> \version "2.18.2"
>
> "part1" = { c''4 4 4 4 }
>
> \score {
> \new Staff \"part1"
> }
>
> As for why you need the quotes… well, I’ll leave the explanation up to
> more knowledgeable people than I
Am 02.10.2018 um 19:34 schrieb csmcd:
> When I try to hide the fingering using either of these methods, I get a core
> dump.
Both versions compile fine and hide the fingering number here.
LilyPond 2.18.2 on Ubuntu (Linux).
Joram
___
lilypond-user ma
Hi David,
> It's easy to tell the developers "make it so". But before you can tell
> a compiler to "make it so", you need to have a logically coherent
> proposal.
I wasn’t trying to tell anybody to "make it so" — I was just avoiding offering
my limited (and almost certainly flawed) understandin
Hi David,
Thanks for the examples and explanations.
> You'd probably also think that
>
> { c = -3 }
>
> is an assignment. It isn't. It is a note c with a relative octave
> check and a fingering of 3 .
Fair enough. So there would, at the very least, be some sort of new assignment
syntax for
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi David,
>
>> It's easy to tell the developers "make it so". But before you can tell
>> a compiler to "make it so", you need to have a logically coherent
>> proposal.
>
> I wasn’t trying to tell anybody to "make it so" — I was just avoiding
> offering my limited (and
Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 21:57 Uhr schrieb Kieren MacMillan
:
> If I were developing Lilypond code, I simply wouldn’t allow a note value to
> be post-fixed to a variable, so
>
>\part2
>
> would have only one interpretation (i.e., as the variable "part2"). But
> that’s only because I can’t see
Hi Harm,
> val = "foo"
> <<
> \new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
> \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val2 \val4 }
> \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val4 \val2 }
>>>
>
> Your proposal would make it impossible.
Another good example — thanks. That being said, putting a syllable in a
variable and th
Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 22:37 Uhr schrieb Kieren MacMillan
:
>
> Hi Harm,
>
> > val = "foo"
> > <<
> > \new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
> > \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val2 \val4 }
> > \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val4 \val2 }
> >>>
> >
> > Your proposal would make it impossible.
>
> Anoth
Hi David,
> I can understand newcomers coming up with this proposal: LilyPond is
> different to how most languages bar TeX treat numbers. But it does
> puzzle me to have the old hands cheer them on.
Only because I’ve needed/wanted numbered variables literally thousands of times
in the past 15 y
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi Harm,
>
>> val = "foo"
>> <<
>> \new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
>> \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val2 \val4 }
>> \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val4 \val2 }
>>
>> Your proposal would make it impossible.
>
> Another good example — thanks. That being said,
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the examples and explanations.
>
>> You'd probably also think that
>>
>> { c = -3 }
>>
>> is an assignment. It isn't. It is a note c with a relative octave
>> check and a fingering of 3 .
>
> Fair enough. So there would, at the very least, b
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 22:37 Uhr schrieb Kieren MacMillan
> :
>>
>> Hi Harm,
>>
>> > val = "foo"
>> > <<
>> > \new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
>> > \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val2 \val4 }
>> > \new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val4 \val4 \val2 }
>> >>>
>> >
>> > Your propo
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi David,
>
>> I can understand newcomers coming up with this proposal: LilyPond is
>> different to how most languages bar TeX treat numbers. But it does
>> puzzle me to have the old hands cheer them on.
>
> Only because I’ve needed/wanted numbered variables literally
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi David,
>
>> I can understand newcomers coming up with this proposal: LilyPond is
>> different to how most languages bar TeX treat numbers. But it does
>> puzzle me to have the old hands cheer them on.
>
> Only because I’ve needed/wanted numbered variables literally
Hi David,
> So what is wrong with using \"var2"
That’s what I generally use — it requires extra typing, looks less attractive,
looks (and is often colourized) different from variables without numbers, etc.
> or \var.2 ?
I was under the impression that mechanism has limitations?
In any case, th
csmcd wrote
> When I try to hide the fingering using either of these methods, I get a
> core
> dump.
It even works in my Windows 7 (32bit) and Windows 10 (64 bit) environments,
tested with a variety of LilyPond versions.
What's your operating system and is there any useful error message?
Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 23:17 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
> So what is wrong with using \"var2" or \var.2 ?
Ah, I forgot about var.1 etc
Ofcourse below is a bit ugly I'd say:
val.1 = "foo"
<<
\new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
\new Lyrics \lyricmode { \val.1 4 \val.1 2 \val.1 4 }
>>
Another p
Thanks, all. The solution I arrived at thanks to your input looked like the
following:
#(define-markup-command (headerThree layout props text)
(markup?)
"Create a level 3 header"
(interpret-markup layout props
#{
\markup {
\column { \vspace #.5 \bold \sans { #text } \vspace #2 }
}
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi David,
>
>> So what is wrong with using \"var2"
>
> That’s what I generally use — it requires extra typing, looks less
> attractive, looks (and is often colourized)
Well, that would warrant improving your LilyPond code colorifier.
> different from variables without
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 23:17 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
>> So what is wrong with using \"var2" or \var.2 ?
>
> Ah, I forgot about var.1 etc
>
> Ofcourse below is a bit ugly I'd say:
>
> val.1 = "foo"
> <<
> \new Staff \repeat unfold 4 c'4
> \new Lyrics \lyricmode {
Hi David,
> The logic does not change every time you cheer
That’s demonstrably false: there have been features which were requested years
ago which were too difficult to implement at the time, but which became easier
to implement later because of other code improvements (many your own doing).
> > Now the (newbie) question: how can I include this code in a LaTeX document
> > (using \lilypondfile) without the last empty measure? I have tried clip-
> > regions in the \layout block with no success.
>
> You can do that by making the last spacer rest use no time by writing
> s1*0\!
>
>
Hi all,
I guess all that’s left is to reiterate my observation that there appears to be
little enthusiasm for pursuing this possible feature.
Thanks for the discussion,
Kieren.
Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenma
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi David,
>
>> The logic does not change every time you cheer
>
> That’s demonstrably false: there have been features which were
> requested years ago which were too difficult to implement at the time,
> but which became easier to implement later because of other code
>
This discussion is strangely familiar. As one who learnt on FORTRAN IV
many years ago, I'm used to seeing that:
READ INPUT TAPE 5, 501, IA, IB, IC
and
READINPUTTAPE5,501,IA,IB,IC
or even
RE ADIN PUTTA PE5,5 01,I A,I B,I C
are the same. I'm sure there were those back in the late '50s arguing
ove
Strange, it's 100% reproducible on my system and I was able to narrow it down
to the tiny segment above. My system is i686 Ubuntu 16.04.
$ lsb_release -a
No LSB modules are available.
Distributor ID: Ubuntu
Description:Ubuntu 16.04.4 LTS
Release:16.04
Codename: xenial
$ uname -s
Am 02.10.2018 um 23:49 schrieb Francesco Napoleoni:
Now the (newbie) question: how can I include this code in a LaTeX document
(using \lilypondfile) without the last empty measure? I have tried clip-
regions in the \layout block with no success.
You can do that by making the last spacer rest u
Kieren MacMillan writes:
> Hi all,
>
> I guess all that’s left is to reiterate my observation that there
> appears to be little enthusiasm for pursuing this possible feature.
This reminds me a bit of a talk in a "Fuzzy Logic" conference where some
speakers basically stated that their approach al
Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 23:17 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
> So what is wrong with using \"var2" or \var.2 ?
As a side note.
I wasn't aware a comma works as well
qwerty,2 = "bar"
Although, while calling it, you _must_ use the dot
\new Lyrics \lyricmode { \qwerty.2 }
Cheers,
Harm
_
I run into this regularly as well, and have been resigned to using
rhPartOne, rhPartTwo, rhPartThree
or
rhPartA, rhPartB, rhPartC
I appreciate hearing about "rh1" and \"rh1". That seems reasonable, albeit
ugly. Thanks for that.
rh.1 would be preferable, but does not work as of 2.18.2.
--
Se
J Martin Rushton writes:
> This discussion is strangely familiar. As one who learnt on FORTRAN IV
> many years ago, I'm used to seeing that:
>
> READ INPUT TAPE 5, 501, IA, IB, IC
> and
> READINPUTTAPE5,501,IA,IB,IC
> or even
> RE ADIN PUTTA PE5,5 01,I A,I B,I C
>
> are the same. I'm sure there
On 02/10/18 23:25, David Kastrup wrote:
> J Martin Rushton writes:
>
>> This discussion is strangely familiar. As one who learnt on FORTRAN IV
>> many years ago, I'm used to seeing that:
>>
>> READ INPUT TAPE 5, 501, IA, IB, IC
>> and
>> READINPUTTAPE5,501,IA,IB,IC
>> or even
>> RE ADIN PUTTA
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 23:17 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
>> So what is wrong with using \"var2" or \var.2 ?
>
> As a side note.
>
> I wasn't aware a comma works as well
> qwerty,2 = "bar"
That's likely a side effect of comma-separated lists having been made
identical t
Am Mi., 3. Okt. 2018 um 00:38 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
> > Am Di., 2. Okt. 2018 um 23:17 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
> >
> >> So what is wrong with using \"var2" or \var.2 ?
> >
> > As a side note.
> >
> > I wasn't aware a comma works as well
> > qwerty,2 = "bar"
>
>
Thomas Morley writes:
> It was an observation, not a proposal.
> Speaking only for myself, I can perfectly life without the
> comma-syntax in definitions and their calls.
It feels weird in definitions. Don't remember whether there was some
original rationale for it (like consistency, possibly c
David Kastrup writes:
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
>> It was an observation, not a proposal.
>> Speaking only for myself, I can perfectly life without the
>> comma-syntax in definitions and their calls.
>
> It feels weird in definitions. Don't remember whether there was some
> original rationale f
48 matches
Mail list logo
