Re: Issue 1553 in lilypond: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Updates: Labels: -Priority-Critical Priority-Medium Comment #4 on issue 1553 by percival.music.ca: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+ http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1553 Ok, good argument. ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
It seems that any markup on the page causes version 2.13.50+ to prefer
stretching the lines, if one line was forced to be stretched.
---
\version 2.13.51
\score {\relative c'' {
c1 c \break
d1 d d d d d d d
} }
\markup hello
[...]
I think this is a bug/regression.
Probably not a bug.
I think the behavior of stretching lines near a forced-stretched line is
intentional -- to keep note-spacing locally uniform. What newer versions
do to this example is just beautiful :
{c''1 \break
\repeat unfold 200 d''
}
The way the markup affects line-spacing behavior in 2.13.51 is odd,
but within the discretion we give to LilyPond. If we need drastically
different line spacing on neighboring lines, then we have to take back
control with \noBreak
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Keith,
-Original Message-
From: Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:18:17 +
To: bug-lilypond bug-lilypond@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
It seems that any markup on the page causes version 2.13.50+ to prefer
stretching the lines, if one line was forced to be stretched.
---
\version 2.13.51
\score {\relative c'' {
c1 c \break
d1 d d d d d d d
} }
\markup hello
[...]
I think this is a bug/regression.
Probably not a bug.
I think the behavior of stretching lines near a forced-stretched line is
intentional -- to keep note-spacing locally uniform. What newer versions
do to this example is just beautiful :
{c''1 \break
\repeat unfold 200 d''
}
The way the markup affects line-spacing behavior in 2.13.51 is odd,
but within the discretion we give to LilyPond. If we need drastically
different line spacing on neighboring lines, then we have to take back
control with \noBreak
Odd?
Actually if you go back to my example that I reported this with
\header {
title = S C H E R Z O
}
\relative c'' {
\time 3/8
\compressFullBarRests
R1*19*3/8 \break| cis4. | d8 r r | R1*2*3/8 | cis4. | d8 r r | \break
R1*20*3/8
}
There is no \markup.
Take away the \header or make it 'blank' and all is fine.
As \header (should have) has no bearing whatsoever on the \score - it'
supposed to just title a page, then the fact this affects the spacing of
my notes is not expected and it isn't a 'little' either.
I can't even play about with the length of the multimeasure rest as it
just makes things worse and springs about all over the place.
You might as well say page numbers affecting the score is acceptable.
While it might be 'expected' behaviour it certainly isn't 'wanted' - at
least from my part. Can tell me how I can get the two MMR on a line each
and my 4 bars on a line on their own, I'll at least be happy if not still
concerned. I've half a dozen scores this is going to affect - otherwise I
have to go back to 2.13.40.
James
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
On 3/9/11, James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com wrote:
Actually if you go back to my example that I reported this with
\header {
title = S C H E R Z O
}
\relative c'' {
\time 3/8
\compressFullBarRests
R1*19*3/8 \break| cis4. | d8 r r | R1*2*3/8 | cis4. | d8 r r | \break
R1*20*3/8
}
In which universe do you consider this to be a tiny example ?? Is
the \time necessary? Are the *19*3/8 necessray? Is the weird spacing
of S C H E... necessary? etc?
No. I have a Tiny example at the end of this email.
BUG SQUAD: you should have rejected James' report immediately, forcing
James to create an actual Tiny example, which would then be much
easier for developers to discuss (and less easy to say meh, yeah,
whatever), and thereby getting a good example into the issue tracker
much sooner. By rejecting a report, you're not telling the reporter
to bugger off; you're actually making the whole process run smoother.
Please add as release-Critical immediately.
\version 2.13.53
\header {
% removing the title changes the spacing of the c1 c c c line below!
title = title
}
\relative c'' {
\compressFullBarRests
R1*4
\break
% this will either be spaced on two systems (including the title)
% or one system (without the title)
c1 c c c
\break
R1*4
}
- Graham
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Issue 1553 in lilypond: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Critical
New issue 1553 by colinpkc...@gmail.com: Staff stretching problem in
2.13.50+
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1553
It seems that any markup on the page causes version 2.13.50+ to prefer
stretching the lines, if one line was forced to be stretched.
\version 2.13.53
\header {
% removing the title changes the spacing of the c1 c c c line below!
title = title
}
\relative c'' {
\compressFullBarRests
R1*4
\break
% this will either be spaced on two systems (including the title)
% or one system (without the title)
c1 c c c
\break
R1*4
}
Attachments:
Title.png 14.3 KB
NoTitle.png 12.5 KB
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
On 11-03-09 05:52 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
\version 2.13.53
\header {
% removing the title changes the spacing of the c1 c c c line below!
title = title
}
\relative c'' {
\compressFullBarRests
R1*4
\break
% this will either be spaced on two systems (including the title)
% or one system (without the title)
c1 c c c
\break
R1*4
}
Added as http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1553
--
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance
of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who
have too little.
-Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd US President (1882-1945)
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
James Lowe James.Lowe at datacore.com writes:
\header {
title = S C H E R Z O
}
\relative c'' {
\time 3/8
\compressFullBarRests
R1*19*3/8 \break| cis4. | d8 r r | R1*2*3/8 | cis4. | d8 r r | \break
R1*20*3/8
}
There is no \markup.
I meant markup in the general sense of text on the score. Any markup at the
top level causes the effect, it doesn't have to be a title
Take away the \header or make it 'blank' and all is fine.
LilyPond can't know that you consider that such a drastic difference in spacing
between visible barlines on adjacent lines to be 'fine'. If it's what you want
then you have to use \noBreak
R1*19*3/8 \break
cis4. \noBreak | d8 r r \noBreak | R1*2*3/8 \noBreak |
cis4. \noBreak | d8 r r | \break
R1*20*3/8
}
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Issue 1553 in lilypond: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Comment #1 on issue 1553 by k-ohara5...@oco.net: Staff stretching problem
in 2.13.50+
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1553
2.12.3 also tries to make the spacing similar on successive lines. The
newer versions just to a better job of it.
\relative c'' {
c1 \break
\repeat unfold 124 c1
}
The original example used \break to force a stretched line, so it can use
\noBreak to prevent the next line from being similarly stretched.
What other behavior is desired?
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Issue 1553 in lilypond: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Comment #2 on issue 1553 by percival.music.ca: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+ http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1553 Sorry for a case of the stupids, but where exactly do you propose that \noBreak should be placed? With 2.13.47 (sorry, old version), putting \noBreak after one bar doesn't change it, but putting it after two bars produces the desired output. I'm not wild about having to put it into random places, but then again this is a somewhat weird case. Is there an easy way to reset the line spacing? Which a user could optionally place after the \break (or maybe a bar after the \break) to make lilypond consider that stretched line the same? I'm no longer convinced that this is a Critical issue, but I'm still glad that it's on the books and we're having this conversation. ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Graham,
-Original Message-
From: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:52:59 +
To: James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com
Cc: Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net, bug-lilypond bug-lilypond@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
On 3/9/11, James Lowe james.l...@datacore.com wrote:
Actually if you go back to my example that I reported this with
\header {
title = S C H E R Z O
}
\relative c'' {
\time 3/8
\compressFullBarRests
R1*19*3/8 \break| cis4. | d8 r r | R1*2*3/8 | cis4. | d8 r r | \break
R1*20*3/8
}
In which universe do you consider this to be a tiny example ??
Umm...6 bars of music of which 4 show the problem and the other 2 are
necessary to show err the problem.
Pretty tiny to me. If I don't have the 4 bars the problem isn't there, if
I have 5+ then the problem is still there. So the issue *could* be some
weird modulo4 bars of music-thing or some internal logic that seems to
fail at small measure counts. I don't know (if I did I wouldn't be
reporting it).
Is
the \time necessary? Are the *19*3/8 necessray?
As far as I was concerned, Possibly and Yes. I could use *1*3/8 or
*2*3/8 the point is if you look I am using \compressFullBarRests which I
think defaults at 10 or 11, so if I wanted them to 'compress' at less I'd
need another line for an override.
Again I didn't know (like my MMR bug on 3/4 time I reported last year) if
this issue as to do with non-'simple' time sigs (er...like my MMR bug I
reported last year) and/or MMRs; and I couldn't evidently reproduce this
easily without understanding what was going on - which keith evidently
does having done a lot of spacing work - or without thinking it was MMR
related.
Is the weird spacing
of S C H E... necessary? etc?
I don't know..it was what I had in my file it was the last line in my
\header block before the problem went away. It also had a ton of \markups
around it which I did remove also.
No. I have a Tiny example at the end of this email.
Thanks.
BUG SQUAD: you should have rejected James' report immediately, forcing
James to create an actual Tiny example, which would then be much
easier for developers to discuss (and less easy to say meh, yeah,
whatever), and thereby getting a good example into the issue tracker
much sooner. By rejecting a report, you're not telling the reporter
to bugger off; you're actually making the whole process run smoother.
Well Keith did have a 'tiny example' but then started on about \markup
which I didn't have in my example (there are no \markup) and yes I NOW
know what he meant by \markup but that wasn't clear to me. So there were
two examples in my email. Had I known what I know now then I wouldn't have
bothered trying to contradict Keith and used his example, but how was I to
know? For all I knew \header {} was something 'special' something
'different' and might have been key.
My problem seems to have been 'guessing' what might have caused the
problem I.e MMRs, keith said no gave me an example that I didn't see was
the same thing and so I just gave mine.
That was all.
James
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Issue 1553 in lilypond: Staff stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Comment #3 on issue 1553 by k-ohara5...@oco.net: Staff stretching problem
in 2.13.50+
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1553
but where exactly do you propose that \noBreak should be placed?
I should have used the plural. \noBreak s at every bar in the troublesome
line will make the intentions clear, or a
\override Score.NonMusicalPaperColumn #'line-break-permission = ##f
...
\revert Score.NonMusicalPaperColumn #'line-break-permission
I know that horizontal and vertical spacing on the page are considered
together for line breaking, but it seems a bit odd that a single-line of
markup (in the header or elsewhere) changes the automatic line-breaking
behavior so much.
\relative c'' {
d1 \break
\repeat unfold 18 c1
} \markup title
So there might be a small bug somewhere, but it doesn't stop us from
engraving as we like.
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Staff Stretching problem in 2.13.50+
Hello,
See attached PNGs
From Keith O'Hara:
---
It seems that any markup on the page causes version 2.13.50+ to prefer
stretching the lines, if one line was forced to be stretched.
\version 2.13.51
\score {\relative c'' {
c1 c \break
d1 d d d d d d d
} }
\markup hello
If the first line has some more c1s added, or if the markup is removed,
then the Ds all go on one line. page-spacing-weight didn't seem to help.
---
I have not verified 2.13.50, but I have verified that the stretching is
not the same in 2.13.40.
I think this is a bug/regression.
James
attachment: 2_13_51.pngattachment: 2_13_40.png___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
