Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Knut Petersen]

Am 07.01.2017 um 21:50 schrieb H. S. Teoh:



I think that the most promising way of attack is to make sure that
Guile-2.0 and Guile-1.8 libraries can be installed in parallel, and
with parallel architectures (most libraries can, Guile-1.8 was not
multiarch-capable when it was removed).

When Debian can include Guile-1.8 without significant cost, why
wouldn't they?  I think that there lies our most promising approach in
the short term.

[...]

Debian does have quite a good number of libraries that can coexist with
different versions of themselves.  And in theory, I'd imagine that it
should be possible to tweak guile-1.8's build scripts so that it
installs into a version-specific path, so as not to have any conflicts
with guile-2.0.  So this should all be possible.  But I don't know how
much actual work it would take to make this all work, though.


On 2016/12/24 I recommended to use OpenSuSE Tumbleweed, and I gave
one reason: In 2011 (!) they changed guile 1.x so that it can coexist with
guile 2.x. They gave a reason for that, you can read it in the changelog:

   *Changed name to guile1 to create new package for factory, based*
   *on the 11.4 guile-1.8.7, to enable lilypond to build. *

Nothing prevents the debian advocates to adopt the changes made
by opensuse.

Nevertheless, as there's more than debian and opensuse,  I'd recommend to
fork guile 1 and use that fork as a git submodule in lilypond.

cu,
 Knut
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Changing midi-tempo within score

[UCas]

Am 08.01.2017 um 00:07 schrieb Noeck:

> {
>   a1
>   \once\omit Score.MetronomeMark
>   \tempo 4 = 50
>   a1
>   \tempo 4 = 60
>   a1
> }
>
> HTH,
> Joram

Uh, nice. I just used \tempo for things like \tempo "Andante" and I did
not know, that I can use it this way.
Thank you.


Am 08.01.2017 um 00:21 schrieb Malte Meyn:
>
> \set Score.tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment 120 4)
>
> anywhere in the score.
>
>

Did not know that either. Interesting. Thank you too.

So, what is the better way for changing the tempo?
Doing it with \tempo seems more... semantic. Isn't it?
Is there any up- or downside with this two commands?


UCas

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Changing midi-tempo within score

[Malte Meyn]

Am 07.01.2017 um 23:34 schrieb UCas:
> I am able to set midi-tempo in my header-file with
> 
> \midi {
>   \context {
> \Score tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment miditempo 4)
>   }
> }
> 
> but how can I change this tempo within the score?

\set Score.tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment 120 4)

anywhere in the score.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Changing midi-tempo within score

[Noeck]

Hi UCas,

Am 07.01.2017 um 23:34 schrieb UCas:
> but how can I change this tempo within the score?

You can use the normal \tempo command and hide it:

{
  a1
  \once\omit Score.MetronomeMark
  \tempo 4 = 50
  a1
  \tempo 4 = 60
  a1
}

HTH,
Joram

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Changing midi-tempo within score

[UCas]

Hi,

at the moment I am working on a medley with changing time signature and
tempo.
I am able to set midi-tempo in my header-file with

\midi {
  \context {
\Score tempoWholesPerMinute = #(ly:make-moment miditempo 4)
  }
}

but how can I change this tempo within the score?
Is it necessary to create multiple parts, or is there some sort of
"inline-method"?


Thanks
UCas

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Controlling hairpin length - revisited!

[David Nalesnik]

On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:28 AM, David Nalesnik
 wrote:
> Hi Kieren,
>
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Kieren MacMillan
>  wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>>> Further down in that thread is an implementation of shorten-pair with
>>> hairpins: 
>>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2016-06/msg00277.html
>>
>> The $1,000,000 Question: Why isn’t this in the distro?  =)
>
> I think the interaction between this and other properties has to be
> nailed down.  I'm not sure if it behaves "as expected" in conjunction
> with whatever other property affects endpoints (to-barline,
> bound-padding).
>
> I'd welcome testing.
>
> Also, there's the issue of programming language.  Should this
> enhancement be added to the C++ original--easy enough-- or should the
> distro ly:hairpin::print be replaced by a Scheme version?
>
> I'd like to see the stencil function in Scheme, because it would then
> be very convenient for users to adapt it to their needs.
>
> A drawback would be speed, but would that even be noticeable?
>


Patch here: https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5029/

Testing welcome!!

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Tips on quick entry

[Nathan Ho]

On 2017-01-06 13:39, Samuel Speer wrote:

Hello list,

It takes me ages to enter the note data into LilyPond. Last night I
spent almost an hour a page just getting notes and lyrics in. Does
anyone have any tips for quick entry? I do have a midi keyboard but
haven't tried it much. It seems slow because I have to switch back and
forth with the computer keyboard to do articulations, durations, etc.


Hi Samuel,

Composing and arranging directly into LilyPond is always going to be 
slow (since you're doing more than just note entry). But if you're just 
transferring music from paper to LilyPond, you can get pretty efficient.


It's important to have a workflow that doesn't involve switching windows 
and typing "lilypond prelude.ly" in the terminal and whatnot. Use 
Frescobaldi or a similar setup with your editor of choice.


Don't feel the need to wait for LilyPond to compile, especially for 
large scores. My approach is to keep typing music continuously. I hit 
Ctrl+M (Frescobaldi) every few bars or so, leave it on in the background 
while I keep transcribing, and maybe glance at its results. It's largely 
a matter of practice -- get really comfortable with LilyPond's syntax so 
you can confidently type a large chunk of music in without needing to 
look at the compiled output. Proofreading comes after the initial sprint 
through the music, and point and click is essential for that.


Oh yeah, and I suggest using \language "english". Save a few characters.


Nathan

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Strange effect of set-global-staff-size

[David Sumbler]

To get around the anomaly I reported previously, I am rewriting my
book-cover generating routine.

I need to use \fromproperty with a variable which is set at the top
level (i.e. outside any \book block).  If necessary, the variable could
be set inside a \book or \bookpart, although this is less convenient.

I have only ever used \fromproperty in a context similar to that shown
in appendix A.11.7 of the NR.

How can I reference a variable that is set at (or near!) the top level
of the input file?  None of my guesses so far have worked.

David



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

> I can't speak for other distros, but at least as far as Debian is
> concerned, if the upstream (i.e., lilypond) source tarball contains
> a copy of the guile-1.8 sources, and the build script is tweaked
> such that it installs a copy of guile 1.8 in paths private to
> lilypond, e.g., /usr/lib/lilypond/guile-1.8 or some such path,
> rather than in system-global paths like /usr/bin/guile, then it
> could probably be made to work.

*If* we bundle guile 1.8 with lilypond, I strongly prefer static
linking of the library (this is, adding `--disable-shared' to guile's
configure script, together with a proper argument to the
`--datarootdir' option to install the .scm files under a lilypond
directory).  This avoids *any* problems with different guile library
versions, and the created lilypond binary can peacefully coexist with
guile 2.0 even in the `/usr' tree.


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 09:42:51PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> "H. S. Teoh"  writes:
> 
> > Of course, the best scenario is that we figure out how to fix the
> > current guile2-related issues before LP 2.20 is released...
> 
> A lot of them require fixing Guile2.  Guile2 has a string API where it
> will not accept anything but Latin-1 strings in a native encoding.
> Everything else requires recoding: it cannot work with utf-8 strings
> even though its API offers only utf-8 as encoding to pass into Guile's
> native (but inaccessible) UCS-32 strings.  It does not allow string
> ports in any encoding but utf-8.  It cannot even pass its own native
> strings through string ports without reencoding.

Wow. That sounds like a totally disastrous API. :-(


> Its reencoding is not transparent for non-proper utf-8.  The Guile
> developers are in complete denial about the unsuitability for an
> extension language about Guile's call gates requiring reencoding for
> every string parameter.

That probably represents a significant overall performance hit. I wonder
if a significant chunk of lilypond's performance problems stem from
this.


> They are also in complete denial about the importance of interpreter
> speed for an _extension_ language: for them, compiler performance is
> everything.
> 
> They also consider it "somebody else's problem" to organize the
> compilation and storage of byte code for an application.
> 
> There is a lot in there where a solution simply cannot be achieved by
> LilyPond on its own, and a lot where a LilyPond-only solution makes
> very little sense in the overall Guile universe.

But surely we aren't the only ones facing these issues?  What about
other guile-dependent projects? Are they crying out too? I can't imagine
this state of things would continue to hold, if so. Sooner or later,
either the guile devs will capitulate and fix their API, or people will
just move away to other extension languages (or fork guile-1.8).


> > but that might need a lot more time. And we might want to keep LP
> > 2.18 in the distros in the meantime, which would mean bundling
> > guile1.8 with LP 2.18.
> 
> I think that the most promising way of attack is to make sure that
> Guile-2.0 and Guile-1.8 libraries can be installed in parallel, and
> with parallel architectures (most libraries can, Guile-1.8 was not
> multiarch-capable when it was removed).
> 
> When Debian can include Guile-1.8 without significant cost, why
> wouldn't they?  I think that there lies our most promising approach in
> the short term.
[...]

Debian does have quite a good number of libraries that can coexist with
different versions of themselves.  And in theory, I'd imagine that it
should be possible to tweak guile-1.8's build scripts so that it
installs into a version-specific path, so as not to have any conflicts
with guile-2.0.  So this should all be possible.  But I don't know how
much actual work it would take to make this all work, though.

In the short term, it will probably be easier to get a new version of
lilypond (containing a suitably-bundled guile-1.8 installation) into the
archive than it is to re-introduce guile-1.8. But I think it's worth a
shot.


T

-- 
ASCII stupid question, getty stupid ANSI.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Kastrup]

"H. S. Teoh"  writes:

> Of course, the best scenario is that we figure out how to fix the
> current guile2-related issues before LP 2.20 is released...

A lot of them require fixing Guile2.  Guile2 has a string API where it
will not accept anything but Latin-1 strings in a native encoding.
Everything else requires recoding: it cannot work with utf-8 strings
even though its API offers only utf-8 as encoding to pass into Guile's
native (but inaccessible) UCS-32 strings.  It does not allow string
ports in any encoding but utf-8.  It cannot even pass its own native
strings through string ports without reencoding.

Its reencoding is not transparent for non-proper utf-8.  The Guile
developers are in complete denial about the unsuitability for an
extension language about Guile's call gates requiring reencoding for
every string parameter.

They are also in complete denial about the importance of interpreter
speed for an _extension_ language: for them, compiler performance is
everything.

They also consider it "somebody else's problem" to organize the
compilation and storage of byte code for an application.

There is a lot in there where a solution simply cannot be achieved by
LilyPond on its own, and a lot where a LilyPond-only solution makes very
little sense in the overall Guile universe.

> but that might need a lot more time. And we might want to keep LP 2.18
> in the distros in the meantime, which would mean bundling guile1.8
> with LP 2.18.

I think that the most promising way of attack is to make sure that
Guile-2.0 and Guile-1.8 libraries can be installed in parallel, and with
parallel architectures (most libraries can, Guile-1.8 was not
multiarch-capable when it was removed).

When Debian can include Guile-1.8 without significant cost, why wouldn't
they?  I think that there lies our most promising approach in the short
term.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 07:53:25PM -, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> 
> Urs Liska wrote Saturday, January 07, 2017 6:59 PM
> 
> > Am 07.01.2017 um 19:46 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
> >> I didn't realize there was so much going on with the transition (or
> >> lack thereof?) to guile 2.0.  What of the idea of packaging the
> >> last known-to-be-good version of guile 1.8 with the lilypond
> >> sources, and just going with that?
> > 
> > Well, Guile2 seems to offer things that we will probably *want* in
> > LilyPond, e.g. support for import/export to XML.
> 
> Without knowing much about Linux distros, I'm wondering if the best
> course of action would be to aim to bundle Guile 1.8 with the LP 2.20
> release.  Would that help in keeping LP in the distros?  Would it
> sidestep the issue of their having to maintain Guile 1.8 alongside
> Guile 2?  But if they insist on recompiling from source, is it even
> possible to "bundle" Guile 1.8 with LP in other than our own
> distributions?
[...]

I can't speak for other distros, but at least as far as Debian is
concerned, if the upstream (i.e., lilypond) source tarball contains a
copy of the guile-1.8 sources, and the build script is tweaked such that
it installs a copy of guile 1.8 in paths private to lilypond, e.g.,
/usr/lib/lilypond/guile-1.8 or some such path, rather than in
system-global paths like /usr/bin/guile, then it could probably be made
to work.

Such a practice might be frowned on by Debian devs, but at least this
way lilypond would have a chance to remain in the Debian-related
distros, which I consider to be pretty important. Otherwise, we risk
losing a significant chunk of our userbase.  Not everyone is willing (or
know how) to compile lilypond from the sources just to get it to run on
a guile2 system.

Of course, the best scenario is that we figure out how to fix the
current guile2-related issues before LP 2.20 is released... but that
might need a lot more time. And we might want to keep LP 2.18 in the
distros in the meantime, which would mean bundling guile1.8 with LP
2.18.


T

-- 
First Rule of History: History doesn't repeat itself -- historians merely 
repeat each other.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Trevor Daniels]

Urs Liska wrote Saturday, January 07, 2017 6:59 PM

> Am 07.01.2017 um 19:46 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
>> I didn't realize there was so much going on with the transition (or lack
>> thereof?) to guile 2.0.  What of the idea of packaging the last
>> known-to-be-good version of guile 1.8 with the lilypond sources, and
>> just going with that?
> 
> Well, Guile2 seems to offer things that we will probably *want* in
> LilyPond, e.g. support for import/export to XML.

Without knowing much about Linux distros, I'm wondering if the best
course of action would be to aim to bundle Guile 1.8 with the LP 2.20
release.  Would that help in keeping LP in the distros?  Would it
sidestep the issue of their having to maintain Guile 1.8 alongside
Guile 2?  But if they insist on recompiling from source, is it even
possible to "bundle" Guile 1.8 with LP in other than our own 
distributions?  And is it feasible to do even that?  Wish I had the
knowledge to know, but I'm sure many on this list will have the answers.

Guile 2 is clearly impracticable for serious LP work at present, so it
has no place in a stable release.  But hopefully work can continue in
the 2.21 development release.  Although slow (pun intended) progress 
is being made: kudos to all those who have managed to get this far.

Trevor
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 07:59:25PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
> 
> Am 07.01.2017 um 19:46 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
> > I didn't realize there was so much going on with the transition (or
> > lack thereof?) to guile 2.0.  What of the idea of packaging the last
> > known-to-be-good version of guile 1.8 with the lilypond sources, and
> > just going with that?
> 
> Well, Guile2 seems to offer things that we will probably *want* in
> LilyPond, e.g. support for import/export to XML.
[...]

True.  But perhaps shipping the guile-1.8 sources with lilypond could be
a temporary stop-gap measure until we figure out why guile 2.0 causes a
dramatic slowdown and problems with UTF characters?


T

-- 
Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different 
results.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Thomas Morley]

Hi,

2017-01-07 17:11 GMT+01:00 David Pirotte :
> Hello,
>
>> ...
>> I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
>> other scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop
>> guile entirely.
>> ...
>
> For info, someone claimed on irc (#guile, freenode) that he/she is closed to
> compile/use lilypond using guile-2.1:
>
> https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guile/2017-01-05
>
> [12:44:11] for the first time in several years, I
> can use lilypond (on Guile 2.1) to compile my infinite hands sheet 
> notes!

I never tried to compile lilypond with a guile version higher than
2.0.13, so I can't say anything about it.

> On this same guile log, further below, you may follow a conversation between 
> the user
> and wingo (1 of the 3 guile maintainers) on what he/she considers 'the last 
> problem
> to solve' ...


A more detailed list of problems (without any warranty to be complete) here:
https://ao2.it/tmp/lilypond-guile2/TODO

Let me emphasize the slow down of LilyPond to a third (or less on huge
scores) and the problems with non-ASCII characters.

If you want to do some experiments, checkout the branch dev/guile-v2-work.
(run configure with the --enable-guile2 option)

Also, a new LilyDev to run in a VB is available, but I'd recommend to
wait for next LilyDev-release, due to some bugfixes.

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Urs Liska]

Am 07.01.2017 um 19:46 schrieb H. S. Teoh:
> I didn't realize there was so much going on with the transition (or lack
> thereof?) to guile 2.0.  What of the idea of packaging the last
> known-to-be-good version of guile 1.8 with the lilypond sources, and
> just going with that?

Well, Guile2 seems to offer things that we will probably *want* in
LilyPond, e.g. support for import/export to XML.

Urs

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[H. S. Teoh]

On Sat, Jan 07, 2017 at 09:59:22AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> "H. S. Teoh"  writes:
[...]
> > I've been able to get Lilypond 2.19 to work in Debian/testing by
> > compiling from source (lilypond git HEAD) with `./configure
> > --enable-guile2`.  There are some Scheme-related deprecation warning
> > messages that show up while lilypond is running, but otherwise it
> > seems to be working just fine.
> 
> If you never use a non-ASCII character and are satisfied with the
> speed of LilyPond dropping to less than a third and its memory
> requirements rising.
> 
> This is not a viable option for serious work.
[...]

Unfortunately, I think you're right. :-(  I've noticed that my newly
compiled lilypond now takes a very noticeable long pause just at startup
time, and seems more sluggish to work through complex scores in general.

I didn't realize there was so much going on with the transition (or lack
thereof?) to guile 2.0.  What of the idea of packaging the last
known-to-be-good version of guile 1.8 with the lilypond sources, and
just going with that?

After having witnessed several such problems with large software
projects (namely, depending on an external library that upstream no
longer maintains, and the new version is not backward compatible), and
having experienced the same thing myself in my own projects, I'm
starting more and more to question the wisdom of depending on external
libraries.  The most practical approach that I'm gradually adopting,
especially for open-source libraries, is to just ship the exact version
of the library that I develop on and test with along with my sources,
and not have to worry about dependency hell (including, by extension,
library upgrade hell) on the users' end.


T

-- 
Heuristics are bug-ridden by definition. If they didn't have bugs, they'd be 
algorithms.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Trouble coloring Ambitus ledger lines

[David Kastrup]

Simon Albrecht  writes:

> TBH though, I don’t have a clue why a compressMMRests music function
> is even needed, i.e. what harm it may do to have skipBars set to ##t
> all the time.

\new Voice
{
  \set Score.skipBars = ##t
  \time 2/4
  c'1
  e'1
}

For voices in Renaissance music (where notes may cross bar lines without
tieing) this may make a difference.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Trouble coloring Ambitus ledger lines

[Simon Albrecht]

On 07.01.2017 17:47, Patrick Karl wrote:
as written the initial MM rests are not compressed , i.e., the 
\compressMMRests command has no effect.


This works:

%
\version "2.19.53"

S = {
  \once \override Staff.LedgerLineSpanner.color = #grey
  \grace s128
  \stopStaff
  \startStaff
  R1*3   % 1-3
  \grace c'128
  c'1 c'''  % 4
}

\score {
  \new Staff \S
  \layout {
\context {
  \Score
  skipBars = ##t
}
\context {
  \Staff
  \consists "Ambitus_engraver"
}
  }
}


TBH though, I don’t have a clue why a compressMMRests music function is 
even needed, i.e. what harm it may do to have skipBars set to ##t all 
the time.


HTH, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Kastrup]

David Pirotte  writes:

> Hello,
>
>> ...
>> I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
>> other scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop
>> guile entirely.
>> ...
>
> For info, someone claimed on irc (#guile, freenode) that he/she is closed to
> compile/use lilypond using guile-2.1:
>
>   https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guile/2017-01-05
>
>   [12:44:11] for the first time in several years, I
>   can use lilypond (on Guile 2.1) to compile my infinite hands sheet 
> notes!
>
> On this same guile log, further below, you may follow a conversation
> between the user
> and wingo (1 of the 3 guile maintainers) on what he/she considers 'the
> last problem
> to solve' ...

Oh good grief.  That one is just for the statistics and can be thrown
out without problem.  Irrelevant.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Tips on quick entry

[David Kastrup]

Richard Shann  writes:

> On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 16:27 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Richard Shann  writes:
>> [...] doesn't cover chord entry - I used to use the
>> > sustain pedal to indicate that the notes played should all be in one
>> > chord, but now I hold down the Alt key - you can do either in Denemo.
>> > The problem with depending on the timing of the ons and offs is that
>> > played musically notes which are intended to be sequential can often not
>> > be so, quite - not a problem I guess if you are playing in slowly,
>> > changing the duration each time it alters.
>> 
>> You know, if Frescobaldi development weren't apparently dead 
>
> Oh, dear. I was going to add that the nice soundsfromsounds video guide
> also failed to draw attention the the "All sharps" or "All flats"
> limitation. It presumably means that a piece with F-sharp and B-flat in
> it would require you to stop off and click on a button when they
> alternated.

A basic scale that is only modified upwards works well.  It turns out
that for the key of C major/A minor, the Bb major scale works well as a
"floor", transliterating keys adjacent to C major and A minor and doing
a reasonable job with harmonic minor as well.

Of course, one should be able to pin the entry key, and it might be
desirable to make ascending/descending patterns behave differently.  But
for pitches "as such" and chord progressions focused around the central
key, this scheme works reasonably well.

>> (no more commits in the repository since October 1 and submitted
>> trivial patches get dropped on the floor), it would be worthwhile to
>> make Frescobaldi decide "chord-or-not" based on the overlap in
>> duration.
>
> I think you could be right - I have so little need for chord entry that
> it has been rather neglected.

"No more commits" in all of Frescobaldi.  And my never applied patch
fixes Frescobaldi being confused about Midi channel numbers (0-15 in the
messages correspond to human-readable channels 1-16 and the current code
makes it impossible to select only channel 1) and is not concerned with
chord mode.

I just stated that working on chord mode is a waste of time when no
patches get applied anymore to Frescobaldi anyway.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Trouble coloring Ambitus ledger lines

[Patrick Karl]

On 9 Jul 2016 I submitted a report titled: Problem coloring Ambitus 
ledger-lines.  A work-around quickly came (thanks Thomas Morley) 
consisting of inserting the following code at the beginning of the music:


  \once \override Staff.LedgerLineSpanner.color = #grey

  \grace s128

  \stopStaff \startStaff


I pointed out an immediate problem with that code that was given a 
further work-around (thanks Simon Albrecht) involving specifying the 
instrumentName in a \with block instead of using a \set command.



The following code:


\version "2.19.53"

S = {
  \once \override Staff.LedgerLineSpanner.color = #grey
  \grace s128
  \stopStaff \startStaff
  R1*3   % 1-3
  \grace c'128
  c'1 c'''  % 4
}

\score {
\new Staff  { \compressMMRests \S }
\layout {   \context { \Staff \consists "Ambitus_engraver" } }
}

shows two more problems with the suggested work-around, namely:


  *  as written the initial MM rests are not compressed , i.e., the 
\compressMMRests command has no effect.


  *  if the line containing the three rests is removed, then the 
compilation fails with the following assertion failure:



Interpreting 
music.../home/gub/NewGub/gub/target/darwin-x86/src/lilypond-git.sv.gnu.org--lilypond.git-release-unstable/lily/sequential-iterator.cc:163 
<0>: failed assertion `!grace_fixups_ || grace_fixups_->start_ >= here_mom_'



and no output is obtained.


Hopefully, someone will have work-arounds for these two problems.


I would also be interesting in knowing why the Ambitus ledger lines are 
handled is such a different manner than, say, the AmbitusNoteHead, which 
doesn't give rise to any of these problems.  The amount of time I have 
spent dealing with problems arising from the original work-around must 
number in the dozens of hours.





___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Replace articulation with glyph

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: "Dave Higgins" 

To: 
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2017 4:03 PM
Subject: Replace articulation with glyph



I'm sure there's a way, but I can't find a good example.

I would like to replace an articulation, e.g. a staccato with a sharp, 
for one note.  The reason is I don't want the sharp to be outside of the 
staff, as in:


c1^\markup { \sharp }\startTrillSpan

I did see where you could change something like dashPlus = \sharp, but I 
couldn't find a way to do that in the file.

--
Dave
Littleton, Colorado


You could do something like this:

{ 
\override TextScript.outside-staff-priority = ##f

\override TextScript.Y-offset = #2
c''1^\markup { \sharp } 
}


--
Phil Holmes

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Pirotte]

Hello,

> ...
> I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
> other scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop
> guile entirely.
> ...

For info, someone claimed on irc (#guile, freenode) that he/she is closed to
compile/use lilypond using guile-2.1:

https://gnunet.org/bot/log/guile/2017-01-05

[12:44:11] for the first time in several years, I
can use lilypond (on Guile 2.1) to compile my infinite hands sheet 
notes!

On this same guile log, further below, you may follow a conversation between 
the user
and wingo (1 of the 3 guile maintainers) on what he/she considers 'the last 
problem
to solve' ...

Cheers,
David


pgpHWIBqn80is.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Replace articulation with glyph

[Dave Higgins]

I'm sure there's a way, but I can't find a good example.

I would like to replace an articulation, e.g. a staccato with a sharp, 
for one note.  The reason is I don't want the sharp to be outside of the 
staff, as in:


c1^\markup { \sharp }\startTrillSpan

I did see where you could change something like dashPlus = \sharp, but I 
couldn't find a way to do that in the file.

--
Dave
Littleton, Colorado
--
Just as I cannot remember any time when I could not read and write, I cannot
remember any time when I did not exercise my imagination in daydreams about
women.
-- George Bernard Shaw
<>___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Tips on quick entry

[Richard Shann]

On Sat, 2017-01-07 at 16:27 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Richard Shann  writes:
> [...] doesn't cover chord entry - I used to use the
> > sustain pedal to indicate that the notes played should all be in one
> > chord, but now I hold down the Alt key - you can do either in Denemo.
> > The problem with depending on the timing of the ons and offs is that
> > played musically notes which are intended to be sequential can often not
> > be so, quite - not a problem I guess if you are playing in slowly,
> > changing the duration each time it alters.
> 
> You know, if Frescobaldi development weren't apparently dead 

Oh, dear. I was going to add that the nice soundsfromsounds video guide
also failed to draw attention the the "All sharps" or "All flats"
limitation. It presumably means that a piece with F-sharp and B-flat in
it would require you to stop off and click on a button when they
alternated.
A better enharmonic range (if it must be fixed) would be E-flat to
G-sharp. But I'm sure William could make the range selectable as in
Denemo. Trickier for Frescobaldi might be to draw attention to
enharmonic mistakes A-flat for G-sharp etc. Denemo plays augmented or
diminished intervals on a different channel as you enter music so you
can easily hear E, A-flat, B-natural when E, G-sharp, B-natural was
intended. Since introducing that feature several years ago I have never
had an enharmonic error in my music.

> (no more
> commits in the repository since October 1 and submitted trivial patches
> get dropped on the floor), it would be worthwhile to make Frescobaldi
> decide "chord-or-not" based on the overlap in duration.

I think you could be right - I have so little need for chord entry that
it has been rather neglected.

Richard


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Tips on quick entry

[David Kastrup]

Richard Shann  writes:

> On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 14:59 -0700, SoundsFromSound wrote:
>> tyronicus wrote
>> > Hello list,
>> > 
>> > It takes me ages to enter the note data into LilyPond. Last night I spent
>> > almost an hour a page just getting notes and lyrics in. Does anyone have
>> > any tips for quick entry? I do have a midi keyboard but haven't tried it
>> > much. It seems slow because I have to switch back and forth with the
>> > computer keyboard to do articulations, durations, etc.
>> > 
>> > Thanks in advance,
>> > Sam
>> > 
>> > ___
>> > lilypond-user mailing list
>> 
>> > lilypond-user@
>> 
>> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I recently made an in-depth video tutorial on how to input music fast with
>> LilyPond and your MIDI keyboard, as well as use Frescobaldi for very quick
>> input (articulations, dynamics, hairpins, etc). If you're interested here is
>> the link: 
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdA1NLcBxLo
>
> That's a lovely looking video! You didn't mention controlling the rhythm
> of the notes that you play in, but you did cover chord entry.
>
> By contrast my video
> https://vimeo.com/61994482
>
> looks quite crummy and doesn't cover chord entry - I used to use the
> sustain pedal to indicate that the notes played should all be in one
> chord, but now I hold down the Alt key - you can do either in Denemo.
> The problem with depending on the timing of the ons and offs is that
> played musically notes which are intended to be sequential can often not
> be so, quite - not a problem I guess if you are playing in slowly,
> changing the duration each time it alters.

You know, if Frescobaldi development weren't apparently dead (no more
commits in the repository since October 1 and submitted trivial patches
get dropped on the floor), it would be worthwhile to make Frescobaldi
decide "chord-or-not" based on the overlap in duration.  That works
pretty well with the Emacs input mode I did.

But why bother when no patch is getting accepted any more?

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting lyrics from LilyPond into Sibelius

[Urs Liska]

Hi Phil,


Am 07.01.2017 um 16:05 schrieb Phil Holmes:
> - Original Message - From: "Urs Liska" 
> To: "lilypond-user" 
> Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2017 2:53 PM
> Subject: Getting lyrics from LilyPond into Sibelius
>
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Frescobaldi's MusicXML export doesn't support lyrics yet (and I don't
>> think it will ever because the lyrics are represented really differently
>> (MusicXML stores each syllable along with the note, so the exporter
>> would have to actually determine where a given syllable ends up).
>>
>> So exporting a file to MusicXML and importing that to Sibelius is
>> necessarily lyrics-free, and I wonder what's the most efficient way to
>> get lyrics into Sibelius.
>>
>> I know that Sibelius can import lyrics from a text file
>> (https://blogs.online.berklee.edu/tomrudolph/2010/09/16/sibelius-lyric-entry-from-a-text-file/)
>>
>> and will automatically apply hyphenation. It's easy to remove
>> hyphenation in Frescobaldi and copy the resulting lyrics to a file, but
>> it would of course be preferrable to preserve the actual hyphenation
>> from the LilyPond file - which may of course have had some manual
>> scrutiny. Unfortunately this blog post doesn't mention this, so I'd like
>> to ask any Sibelius owner here if/how it is possible to feed Sibelius
>> with already-hyphenated lyrics. Converting LilyPond's hyphenation to an
>> arbitrary other syntax should be simple enough.
>>
>> Any suggestions (apart from not using Sibelius, of course)?
>>
>> TIA
>> Urs
>
>
> I've just done a quick test importing some Latin - if there are no
> hyphens, by default Sibelius guesses.  If hyphens are present in the
> text (as a simple - with no spaces: hy-phen) then Sibelius appears to
> obey them and not to try alternatives.

Thanks for this test.
I'll forward this info to the poor guy who has to convert our beautiful
LilyPond scores to Sibelius due to some, well, inert, publisher.

Urs

>
> -- 
> Phil Holmes

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Strange effect of set-global-staff-size

[David Sumbler]

%%%
\version "2.19.48"

#(set-global-staff-size 20)
\book {
  \markup {
\abs-fontsize #48
\bold "Title 1"
  }
}

#(set-global-staff-size 16)
\book {
  \markup {
\abs-fontsize #48
\bold "Title 2"
  } 
}
%%%

The above illustrates the problem I was/am having.  Simon was wrong in
thinking I wouldn't want to share my project, but he was right that I
was trying to save myself a few hours work finding exactly where the
problem was arising: I was hoping that perhaps somebody would recognise
an already well-known problem.  Vaughan has suggested a possible
solution, using \magnifyStaff (which is new to me), and I can now see
another possible work-around.

Compiling the above illustrates the problem well.  The markup in the
first file will always be printed correctly, regardless of the value
given to set-global-staff-size.  The vertical height of the markup in
the second file will also be correct, but the spacing is compressed or
expanded addording to the ratio A/B, where A and B are the set-global-
staff size values of the first and second files respectively.

In my original files the value for the first file is not specifically
set.  But as one would expect, this gives the same result as the above
file, since the default value is 20.

The Notation Reference says:
%%%
To set the staff size globally for all scores in a file (or in a \book
block, to be precise), use set-global-staff-size:
#(set-global-staff-size 14)
The above example sets the global default staff size to 14pt (4.92mm)
and scales all fonts accordingly.
%%%

The implication is that you can have different values for different
books generated by the same file, but in practice one parameter is not
handled as the rest are.  The spacing of a font using abs-fontsize is
not affected at all by the first value of set-global-staff-size, but
subsequent values cause it to be scaled from its natural value.

My mistake seems to be using abs-fontsize.  It only occurred to me
after I had reduced my files to the above minimal example, that I don't
have the same problem with the titles etc. on the first page of actual
music.  Why not?  I think that I must have run up against this same
problem in my very early days of using Lilypond, and probably for that
reason I created 2 variables, myBookTitleMarkupSixteen
and myBookTitleMarkupTwenty, which use \fontsize to give roughly
similar results on the opening page of music in both score and parts.
 I can do something similar for the main title page, I suppose.  But
should it really be necessary to have 2 different specifications in
order to get a consistent output?

This behaviour of set-global-staff-size must surely be regarded as a
bug.  As I pointed out, the printing on the first file's title page
will always be correct whatever the value of set-global-staff-size, but
subsequent ones will have horizontal spacing which depends partly on
the original setting, even though everything else depends only on the
most recent setting.  That surely can't be intentional.

David

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Getting lyrics from LilyPond into Sibelius

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: "Urs Liska" 

To: "lilypond-user" 
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2017 2:53 PM
Subject: Getting lyrics from LilyPond into Sibelius



Hi all,

Frescobaldi's MusicXML export doesn't support lyrics yet (and I don't
think it will ever because the lyrics are represented really differently
(MusicXML stores each syllable along with the note, so the exporter
would have to actually determine where a given syllable ends up).

So exporting a file to MusicXML and importing that to Sibelius is
necessarily lyrics-free, and I wonder what's the most efficient way to
get lyrics into Sibelius.

I know that Sibelius can import lyrics from a text file
(https://blogs.online.berklee.edu/tomrudolph/2010/09/16/sibelius-lyric-entry-from-a-text-file/)
and will automatically apply hyphenation. It's easy to remove
hyphenation in Frescobaldi and copy the resulting lyrics to a file, but
it would of course be preferrable to preserve the actual hyphenation
from the LilyPond file - which may of course have had some manual
scrutiny. Unfortunately this blog post doesn't mention this, so I'd like
to ask any Sibelius owner here if/how it is possible to feed Sibelius
with already-hyphenated lyrics. Converting LilyPond's hyphenation to an
arbitrary other syntax should be simple enough.

Any suggestions (apart from not using Sibelius, of course)?

TIA
Urs



I've just done a quick test importing some Latin - if there are no hyphens, 
by default Sibelius guesses.  If hyphens are present in the text (as a 
simple - with no spaces: hy-phen) then Sibelius appears to obey them and not 
to try alternatives.


--
Phil Holmes 



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Tips on quick entry

[Richard Shann]

On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 14:59 -0700, SoundsFromSound wrote:
> tyronicus wrote
> > Hello list,
> > 
> > It takes me ages to enter the note data into LilyPond. Last night I spent
> > almost an hour a page just getting notes and lyrics in. Does anyone have
> > any tips for quick entry? I do have a midi keyboard but haven't tried it
> > much. It seems slow because I have to switch back and forth with the
> > computer keyboard to do articulations, durations, etc.
> > 
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Sam
> > 
> > ___
> > lilypond-user mailing list
> 
> > lilypond-user@
> 
> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I recently made an in-depth video tutorial on how to input music fast with
> LilyPond and your MIDI keyboard, as well as use Frescobaldi for very quick
> input (articulations, dynamics, hairpins, etc). If you're interested here is
> the link: 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdA1NLcBxLo

That's a lovely looking video! You didn't mention controlling the rhythm
of the notes that you play in, but you did cover chord entry.

By contrast my video
https://vimeo.com/61994482

looks quite crummy and doesn't cover chord entry - I used to use the
sustain pedal to indicate that the notes played should all be in one
chord, but now I hold down the Alt key - you can do either in Denemo.
The problem with depending on the timing of the ons and offs is that
played musically notes which are intended to be sequential can often not
be so, quite - not a problem I guess if you are playing in slowly,
changing the duration each time it alters.

Richard



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Getting lyrics from LilyPond into Sibelius

[Urs Liska]

Hi all,

Frescobaldi's MusicXML export doesn't support lyrics yet (and I don't
think it will ever because the lyrics are represented really differently
(MusicXML stores each syllable along with the note, so the exporter
would have to actually determine where a given syllable ends up).

So exporting a file to MusicXML and importing that to Sibelius is
necessarily lyrics-free, and I wonder what's the most efficient way to
get lyrics into Sibelius.

I know that Sibelius can import lyrics from a text file
(https://blogs.online.berklee.edu/tomrudolph/2010/09/16/sibelius-lyric-entry-from-a-text-file/)
and will automatically apply hyphenation. It's easy to remove
hyphenation in Frescobaldi and copy the resulting lyrics to a file, but
it would of course be preferrable to preserve the actual hyphenation
from the LilyPond file - which may of course have had some manual
scrutiny. Unfortunately this blog post doesn't mention this, so I'd like
to ask any Sibelius owner here if/how it is possible to feed Sibelius
with already-hyphenated lyrics. Converting LilyPond's hyphenation to an
arbitrary other syntax should be simple enough.

Any suggestions (apart from not using Sibelius, of course)?

TIA
Urs


-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG  writes:

>> You probably know about
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2016-11/msg00031.html
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-12/msg00041.html
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-01/msg3.html
>> 
>> Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
>> lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
>> pretty much frustrated.
>
> Well, we have to write again and again.  Right now it's holiday time,
> and people prefer skiing to coding, I guess.  The next mail should be
> sent in a week or so :-)

And don't wait for the queue to clear before sending unrelated reports.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Kastrup]

Thomas Morley  writes:

> 2017-01-07 10:57 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup :
>
>> Now obviously I am not all too well-suited as a role model for
>> communicating with Guile upstream.  I'm just not the kind of man Stephen
>> Turnbull is (who has more or less single-handedly deflated the animosity
>> towards GNU in XEmacs, while having had more than enough personal
>> setbacks to keep it going.  And RMS has not really been the greatest
>> help in that endeavor).
>>
>> But either way, I don't see that the project can do without
>> communicating with Guile, and better than I managed doing.  Even if we
>> end up forking Guile 1, we want to do so in a manner where incremental
>> improvements of Guile developers remain feasible/possible.
>
>
> You probably know about
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2016-11/msg00031.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-12/msg00041.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-01/msg3.html
>
> Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
> lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
> pretty much frustrated.

That's three mails from your side.  It takes a Guile developer 2 minutes
to glance over them and shrug his shoulders if he's not in the mood.  At
the same time, you wait and are impatient for days on end.

So your level of frustration is not proportional to the level of Guile
developers not caring.

With electronic media, getting those levels even somewhat related is
pretty hard.  When I started submitting patches to LilyPond, I got so
frustrated with nothing happening that communication became very heated
and bitter and in the end I asked for commit access in order _not_ to
have to communicate with LilyPond maintainers.

This proposal was discussed privately (in my opinion reasonably so)
among a few LilyPond developers, the results being both that I was
granted commit access, and that Valentin quit working on LilyPond
because he considered the kind of informal private communication and
decision-making in limited circles contrary to the spirit of a community
project.

So long story short: it's very easy to get frustrated at the level of
response from a project for problems which are disproportionally
important as well as urgent to you while being actual real problems of
the project itself.

Making people care is not a one-time effort.  It is easier to do in
personal communication.  If anybody wants to take that up: FOSDEM in
Brussels is up in a few months and sports a Guile developer room and
birds-of-a-feather sessions, and there are still open slots I
understand.

Social engineering does not just concern criminal activities.

> I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
> other scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop
> guile entirely.

I think that forking Guile-1.8 would be much more likely to be
successful.  There is just too much in terms of Guile structures and
concepts going on to make such a transition feasible without several
high-level experts on low-level programming and the Scheme dialect in
question successful.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

>>> Where would I find suitable documentation or tutorials to do so
>>> (doesn't have to be explicitly about Guile 1.8 vs. 2 of course)?
>>
>> It's rather simple.  [...]
>
> To build lilypond we require guile-xx-dev (don't remember if we
> require guile-xx-libs as well).  Will the method described above
> make those files available?

Yes.  `make install' installs everything.


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

> You probably know about
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2016-11/msg00031.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-12/msg00041.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-01/msg3.html
> 
> Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
> lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
> pretty much frustrated.

Well, we have to write again and again.  Right now it's holiday time,
and people prefer skiing to coding, I guess.  The next mail should be
sent in a week or so :-)


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Was RE: Which Linux distro for Lilypond - Now: Guile

[Thomas Morley]

2017-01-07 12:37 GMT+01:00 Urs Liska :
>
>
> Am 7. Januar 2017 12:20:30 MEZ schrieb Andrew Bernard 
> :
>>Hi Harm,
>>
>>I think Bigloo and Chibi at least offer similar embedding
>>functionality,

I first thought about mit-scheme, at least it's GNU as well.
Though, I didn't not even look at their home-page so far.

>>but
>>I have not studied the matter deeply. If the Guile developers are
>>recalcitrant, a long term project may be to change? [Very
>>pie-in-the-sky I
>>know, but since you mentioned it...]
>
> I think the problem is that we're not talking about a Scheme implementation 
> alone but that all of LilyPond's code is hooked into Guile.

Indeed.

Cheers,
  Harm

>
> Urs
>
>>
>>Andrew
>>
>>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: lilypond-user On Behalf Of Thomas Morley
>>Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2017 10:09 PM
>>
>>
>>Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
>>lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
>>pretty
>>much frustrated.
>>I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
>>other
>>scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop guile
>>entirely.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Was RE: Which Linux distro for Lilypond - Now: Guile

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Urs,

I know. That's why I mentioned those two of the hundreds of Schemes, as
they offer embedding into C progs. Also Chicken, I believe.

Given that writing a fairly full blooded Scheme interpreter is a standard
student exercise, it is not that that is the problem. It's the task of
embedding inside a C++ environment and passing stuff to and fro.


Andrew


On 7 January 2017 at 22:37, Urs Liska  wrote:

>
> I think the problem is that we're not talking about a Scheme
> implementation alone but that all of LilyPond's code is hooked into Guile.
>
> Urs
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Was RE: Which Linux distro for Lilypond - Now: Guile

[Urs Liska]

Am 7. Januar 2017 12:20:30 MEZ schrieb Andrew Bernard 
:
>Hi Harm,
>
>I think Bigloo and Chibi at least offer similar embedding
>functionality, but
>I have not studied the matter deeply. If the Guile developers are
>recalcitrant, a long term project may be to change? [Very
>pie-in-the-sky I
>know, but since you mentioned it...]

I think the problem is that we're not talking about a Scheme implementation 
alone but that all of LilyPond's code is hooked into Guile.

Urs

>
>Andrew
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: lilypond-user On Behalf Of Thomas Morley
>Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2017 10:09 PM
>
>
>Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
>lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
>pretty
>much frustrated.
>I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
>other
>scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop guile
>entirely.
>
>
>
>___
>lilypond-user mailing list
>lilypond-user@gnu.org
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Was RE: Which Linux distro for Lilypond - Now: Guile

[Andrew Bernard]

Hi Harm,

I think Bigloo and Chibi at least offer similar embedding functionality, but
I have not studied the matter deeply. If the Guile developers are
recalcitrant, a long term project may be to change? [Very pie-in-the-sky I
know, but since you mentioned it...]

Andrew


-Original Message-
From: lilypond-user On Behalf Of Thomas Morley
Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2017 10:09 PM


Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm pretty
much frustrated.
I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore other
scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop guile entirely.



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Thomas Morley]

2017-01-07 10:57 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup :
> Werner LEMBERG  writes:
>
>>> Unfortunately I ran into this very issue, changing from Debian
>>> stable (in the Linux Mint Debian Edition incarnation) to vanilla
>>> Debian testing. I did this because the PyQt5 packages in stable are
>>> too old to run current Frescobaldi from its Git repository.  Now
>>> that I managed to get Frescobaldi running again I can't build
>>> LilyPond anymore because in Debian testing I don't have guile 1.8
>>> anymore :-(
>>>
>>> For working *with* LilyPond it's not much of an issue to use the
>>> releases, but I can't work *on* LilyPond right now ...
>>
>> Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...
>> Have you tried that already?
>>
>> Maybe we have to bite the bullet and distribute guile 1.8 together
>> with lilypond.  I know that this is a step into the wrong direction
>> since it doesn't force the guile maintainers to improve guile 2.x so
>> that lilypond can use it...
>
> The Guile maintainers are not interested in improving Guile 2.x so that
> LilyPond can use it.
>
> I'm no longer involved in LilyPond management, and others aren't yet
> banned from posting messages on Guile-devel, so ignoring them will take
> more than semi-annual lip service in private mail to RMS without any
> followup actions.
>
> I think it would be reasonable to figure out how to keep the Guile
> developer lists regularly informed of current problems, of the
> comparative performance issues, and of the necessity to revert to an
> older Guile version (possibly creating a fork in order to get a few more
> problems fixed) because Guile-2.x is
>
> a) developing in a direction making it less rather than more suited as
> an extension language
> b) not bothering at all about keeping their invested users on-board
>
> Now obviously I am not all too well-suited as a role model for
> communicating with Guile upstream.  I'm just not the kind of man Stephen
> Turnbull is (who has more or less single-handedly deflated the animosity
> towards GNU in XEmacs, while having had more than enough personal
> setbacks to keep it going.  And RMS has not really been the greatest
> help in that endeavor).
>
> But either way, I don't see that the project can do without
> communicating with Guile, and better than I managed doing.  Even if we
> end up forking Guile 1, we want to do so in a manner where incremental
> improvements of Guile developers remain feasible/possible.
>
> --
> David Kastrup


You probably know about
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-user/2016-11/msg00031.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2016-12/msg00041.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guile-devel/2017-01/msg3.html

Regarding all the bugreports I listed there (probably with impact to
lilypond usinf guilev2) and the amount of replies to my posts I'm
pretty much frustrated.
I already had the vague thought how much work it might be to explore
other scheme-dialects, adjust whole lilypond to use them and drop
guile entirely.

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Thomas Morley]

2017-01-07 11:00 GMT+01:00 Werner LEMBERG :
>
>>> Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...
>>
>> Probably not, but ...
>>
>>> Have you tried that already?
>>
>> ... i am not familiar enough with all this packaging stuff to be
>> confident about installing alternative versions to system installed
>> packages ...
>
> You would install that locally – this is simpler than global locations
> like `/usr/local'.
>
>> Where would I find suitable documentation or tutorials to do so
>> (doesn't have to be explicitly about Guile 1.8 vs. 2 of course)?
>
> It's rather simple.
>
>   cd ~
>   mkdir gnu-packages
>   wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guile/guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
>   tar xzvf guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
>   cd guile-1.8.8
>   ./configure --disable-error-on-warning --prefix=`pwd`/../gnu-packages
>
> Check the `configure' output carefully (which gets logged in file
> `config.log'); it tells you what you have to install as prerequisites
> besides a C compiler.  If you get a failure, siply restart the
> `configure' script (with all options) until it succeeds.  Finally, do
>
>   make
>   make install
>
> That's it.  If you configure and build lilypond, do it with
>
>   PATH=~/gnu-packages/bin:$PATH ./configure ...
>
> so that `guile-config' from version 1.8.8 gets found before the one
> from the OS.
>
>
> Werner


To build lilypond we require guile-xx-dev (don't remember if we
require guile-xx-libs as well).
Will the method described above make those files available?

Cheers,
  Harm

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

>   ./configure --disable-error-on-warning --prefix=`pwd`/../gnu-packages

Ah, using `pwd' here is a bad idea, sorry.  You should rather use

  ./configure --disable-error-on-warning --prefix=$HOME/gnu-packages

So here are the complete instructions again.

  cd $HOME
  mkdir gnu-packages
  wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guile/guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
  tar xzvf guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
  cd guile-1.8.8
  ./configure --disable-error-on-warning --prefix=$HOME/gnu-packages
  make
  make install


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

> If you get a failure, simply restart the `configure' script (with
> all options) until it succeeds.

Of course you have to fix the problem first that makes `configure'
fail :-)


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

>> Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...
> 
> Probably not, but ...
> 
>> Have you tried that already?
> 
> ... i am not familiar enough with all this packaging stuff to be
> confident about installing alternative versions to system installed
> packages ...

You would install that locally – this is simpler than global locations
like `/usr/local'.

> Where would I find suitable documentation or tutorials to do so
> (doesn't have to be explicitly about Guile 1.8 vs. 2 of course)?

It's rather simple.

  cd ~
  mkdir gnu-packages
  wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/guile/guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
  tar xzvf guile-1.8.8.tar.gz
  cd guile-1.8.8
  ./configure --disable-error-on-warning --prefix=`pwd`/../gnu-packages

Check the `configure' output carefully (which gets logged in file
`config.log'); it tells you what you have to install as prerequisites
besides a C compiler.  If you get a failure, siply restart the
`configure' script (with all options) until it succeeds.  Finally, do

  make
  make install

That's it.  If you configure and build lilypond, do it with

  PATH=~/gnu-packages/bin:$PATH ./configure ...

so that `guile-config' from version 1.8.8 gets found before the one
from the OS.


Werner
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Kastrup]

Werner LEMBERG  writes:

>> Unfortunately I ran into this very issue, changing from Debian
>> stable (in the Linux Mint Debian Edition incarnation) to vanilla
>> Debian testing. I did this because the PyQt5 packages in stable are
>> too old to run current Frescobaldi from its Git repository.  Now
>> that I managed to get Frescobaldi running again I can't build
>> LilyPond anymore because in Debian testing I don't have guile 1.8
>> anymore :-(
>> 
>> For working *with* LilyPond it's not much of an issue to use the
>> releases, but I can't work *on* LilyPond right now ...
>
> Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...
> Have you tried that already?
>
> Maybe we have to bite the bullet and distribute guile 1.8 together
> with lilypond.  I know that this is a step into the wrong direction
> since it doesn't force the guile maintainers to improve guile 2.x so
> that lilypond can use it...

The Guile maintainers are not interested in improving Guile 2.x so that
LilyPond can use it.

I'm no longer involved in LilyPond management, and others aren't yet
banned from posting messages on Guile-devel, so ignoring them will take
more than semi-annual lip service in private mail to RMS without any
followup actions.

I think it would be reasonable to figure out how to keep the Guile
developer lists regularly informed of current problems, of the
comparative performance issues, and of the necessity to revert to an
older Guile version (possibly creating a fork in order to get a few more
problems fixed) because Guile-2.x is

a) developing in a direction making it less rather than more suited as
an extension language
b) not bothering at all about keeping their invested users on-board

Now obviously I am not all too well-suited as a role model for
communicating with Guile upstream.  I'm just not the kind of man Stephen
Turnbull is (who has more or less single-handedly deflated the animosity
towards GNU in XEmacs, while having had more than enough personal
setbacks to keep it going.  And RMS has not really been the greatest
help in that endeavor).

But either way, I don't see that the project can do without
communicating with Guile, and better than I managed doing.  Even if we
end up forking Guile 1, we want to do so in a manner where incremental
improvements of Guile developers remain feasible/possible.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Urs Liska]

Am 07.01.2017 um 10:20 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
>> Unfortunately I ran into this very issue, changing from Debian
>> stable (in the Linux Mint Debian Edition incarnation) to vanilla
>> Debian testing. I did this because the PyQt5 packages in stable are
>> too old to run current Frescobaldi from its Git repository.  Now
>> that I managed to get Frescobaldi running again I can't build
>> LilyPond anymore because in Debian testing I don't have guile 1.8
>> anymore :-(
>>
>> For working *with* LilyPond it's not much of an issue to use the
>> releases, but I can't work *on* LilyPond right now ...
> Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...

Probably not, but ...

> Have you tried that already?

... i am not familiar enough with all this packaging stuff to be
confident about installing alternative versions to system installed
packages ...

Where would I find suitable documentation or tutorials to do so (doesn't
have to be explicitly about Guile 1.8 vs. 2 of course)?

URs

>
> Maybe we have to bite the bullet and distribute guile 1.8 together
> with lilypond.  I know that this is a step into the wrong direction
> since it doesn't force the guile maintainers to improve guile 2.x so
> that lilypond can use it...
>
>
> Werner

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Tips on quick entry

[Richard Shann]

On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 14:36 -0800, Glen Larsen wrote:
> Try the hints on this page, especially frescobaldi, if you haven't
> checked it out already.
> 
> 
> Since I think you will get many suggestions, 

I suspect you won't get many suggestions from people who use the Denemo
front end though, as the majority of them never look at the LilyPond or
tweak it directly, and so never come to this list. I would like that to
change, because at least for some sorts of transcribing Denemo offers
efficiencies that exceed those available in any other program.

> here is a short description of my working process for transcribing
> sheet music for the Mutopia Project. You may not find it applicable to
> your process and working layout but it is quite efficient for me.
> 
> 
> - Ubuntu linux with 3 windows, an emacs editor and 2 pdf viewers, one
> for source, one for LilyPond output. I overlay the LilyPond output
> over the source so that only the source system of interest is showing.
> (Working from paper is actually quicker but I am a paperless kind of
> guy.)

Denemo adds to this the possibility of putting links in the music you
entered back to the source, and the ability to mask off those systems
which you are not transcribing from, so that you don't find yourself
going on to the wrong system at line end. (There is also a third pdf you
can open - an annotated version of LilyPond's output which your client
has sent back holding corrections, with this you can point-and-click to
enter the corrections directly in your source).



> - Typically treble in one voice, bass in another (I transcribe mostly
> classical guitar music), one measure per line with bar checks ('|').
> (In emacs, when '|' is typed, the time for the measure is calculated
> and displayed.)
> - Transcribe only notes, no dynamics, markups, etc.

Denemo's main trick for improving the efficiency of entering notes is to
allow you to set more than just the duration of the current note - you
can enter the durations for an entire bar, line or (as I do, being now
practised with this system, an entire movement). Then you can play in
the pitches using a MIDI keyboard without pausing.
Refinements of this method of entering rhythms now include entering
dotted rhythms in two keystrokes and triplets in three key strokes. so
you can enter the rhythms rhythmically. Slurs are entered with the
rhythm by holding down the control key while entering the duration (it
slurs on from previous note).
I do however break rhythm while entering durations to enter dynamics and
ornaments, but this is because these are so simple in the music I
transcribe that I can do those with one or two keystrokes, without
looking away from the source. And I do use some abbreviations (such as a
keystroke to complete the bar with the rhythmic pattern already entered,
or with the last duration or to duplicate the rhythm of the previous
bar, when there is a lot of pattern repetition in the rhythms.


> - Transcribe treble first, reviewing each system as you finish.
> - While transcribing bass, review treble.
> - Add dynamics and markups using point-and-click, reviewing once more.
> - Walk through with midi.
> - I let LilyPond position/auto-beam/etc. then do a tweaking pass if
> necessary.

This is the other place where Denemo can offer a significant advantage -
you can drag slur and tie shapes around on the final LilyPond typeset.
This is not as easy, I suspect, as in drawing-based programs such as
Musesore, Sibelius and Finale, but it's not needed so very often in the
music I typeset.
> 
> 
> I use the compile command in emacs as I work so that clicking on an
> error message will take me to the problem line. This method allows me
> to work entirely from emacs, only moving to the pdf viewers when need
> to I scroll to the next system in the source.

In Denemo you have to open a separate window to see the LilyPond
generated with the error highlighted. Moving the cursor around here
moves the cursor in your source.
> 
> 
> - I prefer 'fixed' entry over absolute and relative.
> - make generous use of 'repeat unfold' for short repeated patterns.
> - use 'q' note entry for repeated chords.

While a GUI allows you to generate repeated stuff with ease of course
(the Enter key repeats a bar for example) you don't get the same control
over the LilyPond output. You would have to work harder to generate
specific sorts of LilyPond output and there you might find a different
trade-off between effort and result.

> 
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Samuel Speer 
> wrote:
> Hello list,
> 
> 
> It takes me ages to enter the note data into LilyPond. Last
> night I spent almost an hour a page

I have settled in to a speed of an hour for a sonata with three or four
movements, a dozen or so pages.

Richard




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Unfortunately I ran into this very issue, changing from Debian
> stable (in the Linux Mint Debian Edition incarnation) to vanilla
> Debian testing. I did this because the PyQt5 packages in stable are
> too old to run current Frescobaldi from its Git repository.  Now
> that I managed to get Frescobaldi running again I can't build
> LilyPond anymore because in Debian testing I don't have guile 1.8
> anymore :-(
> 
> For working *with* LilyPond it's not much of an issue to use the
> releases, but I can't work *on* LilyPond right now ...

Mhmm, compiling and installing guile 1.8 is not rocket science...
Have you tried that already?

Maybe we have to bite the bullet and distribute guile 1.8 together
with lilypond.  I know that this is a step into the wrong direction
since it doesn't force the guile maintainers to improve guile 2.x so
that lilypond can use it...


Werner

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[Urs Liska]

Am 07.01.2017 um 09:59 schrieb David Kastrup:
> "H. S. Teoh"  writes:
>
>> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 10:36:02AM +, Dr Nicholas Bailey wrote:
>>> Watch out for Debian. There isn't a Lilypond in Testing (Stretch)
>>> AFAIK. It's because they've removed the old scheme version. I develop
>>> in Testing in the hope that by the time I get around to releasing
>>> anything, it will be compatible with Stable :) Stable released rather
>>> infrequently, but I use it on our servers and it is very, well,
>>> *stable*.
>>>
>>> It's easy to install the Stable lilypond debian package on a Testing
>>> Debian box, fortunately. Debian is my favourite distro: I've tried
>>> others but always returned. Shame about the scheme thing, but it will
>>> sort itself out sooner or later (if it hasn't already!). I guess the
>>> clue's in the distribution name: "Testing" ;)
>> [...]
>>
>> I've been able to get Lilypond 2.19 to work in Debian/testing by
>> compiling from source (lilypond git HEAD) with `./configure
>> --enable-guile2`.  There are some Scheme-related deprecation warning
>> messages that show up while lilypond is running, but otherwise it seems
>> to be working just fine.
> If you never use a non-ASCII character and are satisfied with the speed
> of LilyPond dropping to less than a third and its memory requirements
> rising.
>
> This is not a viable option for serious work.
>

Unfortunately I ran into this very issue, changing from Debian stable
(in the Linux Mint Debian Edition incarnation) to vanilla Debian
testing. I did this because the PyQt5 packages in stable are too old to
run current Frescobaldi from its Git repository.
Now that I managed to get Frescobaldi running again I can't build
LilyPond anymore because in Debian testing I don't have guile 1.8
anymore :-(

For working *with* LilyPond it's not much of an issue to use the
releases, but I can't work *on* LilyPond right now ...

Urs

-- 
u...@openlilylib.org
https://openlilylib.org
http://lilypondblog.org


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Which Linux distro for Lilypond

[David Kastrup]

"H. S. Teoh"  writes:

> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 10:36:02AM +, Dr Nicholas Bailey wrote:
>> Watch out for Debian. There isn't a Lilypond in Testing (Stretch)
>> AFAIK. It's because they've removed the old scheme version. I develop
>> in Testing in the hope that by the time I get around to releasing
>> anything, it will be compatible with Stable :) Stable released rather
>> infrequently, but I use it on our servers and it is very, well,
>> *stable*.
>> 
>> It's easy to install the Stable lilypond debian package on a Testing
>> Debian box, fortunately. Debian is my favourite distro: I've tried
>> others but always returned. Shame about the scheme thing, but it will
>> sort itself out sooner or later (if it hasn't already!). I guess the
>> clue's in the distribution name: "Testing" ;)
> [...]
>
> I've been able to get Lilypond 2.19 to work in Debian/testing by
> compiling from source (lilypond git HEAD) with `./configure
> --enable-guile2`.  There are some Scheme-related deprecation warning
> messages that show up while lilypond is running, but otherwise it seems
> to be working just fine.

If you never use a non-ASCII character and are satisfied with the speed
of LilyPond dropping to less than a third and its memory requirements
rising.

This is not a viable option for serious work.

-- 
David Kastrup

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user