Re: Back in the Pond
Alexander Kobelwrites: > +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { > ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for > choir literature (especially combined with the upcoming automatic > extenders). Unfortunately, assignment of lyrics to *container* > contexts does not work (at least, not reliably), and extender > generation is completely defunct. Uh, I thought that people replaced extenders right now? > I reported that in a thread from 2016-12-26 on bug-lilypond, but could > not motivate any supporters yet. The container context issue would want to be tackled by a melisma translator (working both in Midi and PDF since we want the same results there). That work is unfinished and somewhat pervasive. So it's a bit unlikely for 2.20. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Regression-Test Account
Hi, I want to support lilypond with some regression testing - unfortunately I'm not able to enroll... "Server Error in '/' Application. The Microsoft Jet database engine cannot open the file 'D:\inetpub\vhosts\philholmes.me.uk\private\RegTests\RegTestRater.mdb'. It is already opened exclusively by another user, or you need permission to view its data." Any hints? Joei ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Bug in german documentation
Hi, not sure, if I'm right on this list for this issue - if not, pls point me where to go :) on http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/typesetting-mensural-music the example for "Mensuraler F-Schlüssel im Petrucci-Stil" is not f-key but c-key... Joei ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: How to create measure with only slashes
On 2017-01-19 18:19, Rob Torop wrote: I'dlike to create a measure that has 4 forward slashes in it (only). This does almost what I want except of course it has the rest at the start: \repeat percent 4 { r4 } Is there a way to get just 4 slashes? Hi Rob, Here's how I do it: { \override Rest #'stencil = #ly:percent-repeat-item-interface::beat-slash \override Rest #'thickness = #0.48 \override Rest #'slope = #1.7 \repeat unfold 16 { r4 } } Nathan ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
How to create measure with only slashes
I'dlike to create a measure that has 4 forward slashes in it (only). This does almost what I want except of course it has the rest at the start: \repeat percent 4 { r4 } Is there a way to get just 4 slashes? ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Back in the Pond
Hi David, On 2017-01-19 12:59, Trevor Daniels wrote: David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up somewhat shortlived. Really sorry to hear that, but it's great to have you back! Ditto. I wish that you would have had better luck with that endeavor... So for the short time range, I am again dependent on support by other LilyPond lovers. I'll definitely turn on my financial contribution again. Ditto, although it's just a drop in a mostly empty bucket... So what's next on my agenda? [...] And, of course, this is an opportunity to try putting out the 2.20 release finally. Definitely the top priority, IMO. +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for choir literature (especially combined with the upcoming automatic extenders). Unfortunately, assignment of lyrics to *container* contexts does not work (at least, not reliably), and extender generation is completely defunct. I reported that in a thread from 2016-12-26 on bug-lilypond, but could not motivate any supporters yet. I saw a comment by you that you are aware of the issue; can't remember where, it was at some point during my (unsuccessful) debugging streak for the problem - might well be a very old comment in the issue tracker or a commit message or the like. May I kindly ask you to have a look and think about whether this might be tackleable before 2.20? I have no good intuition for the complexity of this issue; the *specification* part should be reasonably simple (which syllable corresponds to which note(s)), but I don't know what kind of difficulties the current design presents for actually coding it. Cheers, Alexander ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Back in the Pond
David Kastrup wrote > Hi fellow ponders, > > it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up > somewhat shortlived. > > So for the short time range, I am again dependent on support by other > LilyPond lovers. > > Sorry for turning on dime again here. > > But at any rate, I hope to be on board at least for making LilyPond 2.20 > a thing. > > -- > David Kastrup > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user David, Sorry that you're going through this back and forth new-job situation stuff (I know what that's like), but I'm glad that you're now able to come back and help LilyPond get to 2.20 and perhaps beyond...I hope the support is going to be enough where you can continue where you left off comfortably, financially. Thank you for all that you have done so far! Much appreciated! - composer | sound designer | asmr artist LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Back-in-the-Pond-tp199344p199372.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Changing the staff of a note inside of a chord
Am 19.01.2017 um 22:02 schrieb Amir Teymuri: > how can i change the Staff of only one note of a chord? For cross staff stems see http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-keyboards#cross_002dstaff-stems ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Re Spacing Staff Groups
Peter Gentry wrote > Brian Barker has kindly put me straight and supplied the answer > > > > \paper { system-system-spacing.basic-distance = #25 } > > > > He also corrected my assumption as to the definition of a system. > > > > Thanks Brian > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Was his response posted on the same thread you begin, or somewhere else? I had answered your original thread but saw no response since mine. http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Spacing-between-Staff-Groups-td199352.html - composer | sound designer | asmr artist LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Re-Spacing-Staff-Groups-tp199365p199370.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
RE: Changing the staff of a note inside of a chord
Amir, Some instructions for cross staff stems are at http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-key boards#cross_002dstaff-stems Mark -Original Message- From: lilypond-user [mailto:lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr@gnu.org] On Behalf Of Amir Teymuri Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 1:02 PM To: lilypondSubject: Changing the staff of a note inside of a chord Hello, how can i change the Staff of only one note of a chord? For example if i have the following line: r2 8[ 8] r8 8 and want to change the staff of only the very last bes'' to be on the base clef (with the rest of the chord being remained at treble clef)? Thanks, Amir ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Changing the staff of a note inside of a chord
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:02:00PM +0100, Amir Teymuri wrote: > Hello, > > how can i change the Staff of only one note of a chord? For example if > i have the following line: > > r2 8[8] r8 8 > > and want to change the staff of only the very last bes'' to be on the > base clef (with the rest of the chord being remained at treble clef)? [...] Would this help? http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/common-notation-for-keyboards#cross_002dstaff-stems T -- Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous? -- Hobbes, from Calvin & Hobbes ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Changing the staff of a note inside of a chord
Hello, how can i change the Staff of only one note of a chord? For example if i have the following line: r2 8[8] r8 8 and want to change the staff of only the very last bes'' to be on the base clef (with the rest of the chord being remained at treble clef)? Thanks, Amir ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re Spacing Staff Groups
Brian Barker has kindly put me straight and supplied the answer \paper { system-system-spacing.basic-distance = #25 } He also corrected my assumption as to the definition of a system. Thanks Brian ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Arrow on cross-staves arpeggio
Hi David, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:10 AM, David Sumblerwrote: > On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 15:07 -0600, David Nalesnik wrote: >> arpeggioArrowUp will apply to a bottom context. Rewriting its >> definition (in ly/property-init.ly) will work here: >> >> arpeggioArrowUp = { >> \revert PianoStaff.Arpeggio.stencil >> \revert PianoStaff.Arpeggio.X-extent >> \override PianoStaff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction = #UP >> } >> >> Hope this helps-- >> David > > It definitely helps! Thank you. > > For my better understanding, could you explain exactly what is > happening here? > > I take it that \arpeggioArrowUp applies to a Voice context, and that > somehow setting PianoStaff.connectArpeggios to #t doesn't alter this > fact. Yes, the definition of arpeggioArrowUp in ly/property-init.ly doesn't specify a context, so we fall back on Voice: arpeggioArpeggioUp = { \revert Arpeggio.stencil \revert Arpeggio.X-extent \override Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction = #UP } > > But I don't understand what the 2 \reverts are doing in the new > definition. What are they reverting to? Perhaps #f and 0 > respectively? They are there because of possible interactions with other arpeggio[...] commands. For example, arpeggioBracket overrides Arpeggio.stencil, and arpeggioParenthesis overrides both Arpeggio.stencil and Arpeggio.X-extent. > > In the light of your reply I have now altered my file, and after a bit > of experimentation I find that all I need is: > \set PianoStaff.connectArpeggios = ##t > \override PianoStaff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction = #UP > and then > \revert PianoStaff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction > when I no longer require the arrow (which is after the first > arpeggiando in this case). Or just \once \override. Yeah, for a one-off this is all you need! Best, David N ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Unorthodox notation
Hi David, David Sumbler wrote > Another approach would, of course, be to tie each note of the sextuplet > directly to the note in the following chord. I have not tried this > because I don't know how it can be done. search the notation reference for: \set tieWaitForNote = ##t Cheers, Klaus -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Unorthodox-notation-tp199361p199363.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Unorthodox notation
Sorry - I pressed "Send" too soon on my previous message, which contains some nonsense. Here is a more sensible version. The piece I am setting has 4 bars of somewhat unorthodox notation. My best attempt at reproducing this is: %% \version "2.19.48" lv = \laissezVibrer lvUp = \once \override LaissezVibrerTie.direction = #UP \new PianoStaff << \new Staff = "RH" \relative { \time 2/4 \stemUp \tieUp b'8 ~ <\tweak RepeatTie.stencil ##f b fis d>4.\rt | b8 ~ 4.\rt | } \new Staff = "LH" \relative { \clef "bass" \time 2/4 << { s8 4.\rt } \\ { \tuplet 6/4 { \change Staff = RH b'='32\lv fis\lv d\lv \change Staff = LH \lvUp b\lv \lvUp fis\lv d } b4. } >> << { s8 4.\rt } \\ { \tuplet 6/4 { \change Staff = RH b'='32\lv ais\lv g\lv \change Staff = LH \lvUp b,\lv \lvUp ais\lv g } b,4. }>> } > > > > > %% I am attaching a pdf of the output, but I'm not sure whether it will make it through to the list. The intention of the notation is clear, I think, but there are 2 things wrong with this output. 1) There should not be a RepeatTie on the top note of the right-hand chords, nor should there be a LaissezVibrerTie on the first note of the bar. 2) In the second bar chord, the RepeatTie on the A# of the left hand chord is too close to the RepeatTie on the G. The best solution here would be for the tie on the G to be inverted. 3) Also in the second bar the RepeatTie on the right hand A# needs to curve downwards to match the LaissezVibrerTie on the earlier A#. The would look a bit strange, but probably not as strange as inverting the LVTie. I have experimented with the material at http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=714 I can certainly solve any problems with the LVTies using this snippet, but my attempts to adapt it to produce something similar for RepeatTies have not been successful. Another approach would, of course, be to tie each note of the sextuplet directly to the note in the following chord. I have not tried this because I don't know how it can be done. Also I think that it might look over-cluttered, and that the original notation is perhaps better. Can anyone offer pointers or a solution? David test.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Unorthodox notation
The piece I am setting has 4 bars of somewhat unorthodox notation. My best attempt at reproducing this is: %% \version "2.19.48" lv = \laissezVibrer lvUp = \once \override LaissezVibrerTie.direction = #UP rt = \repeatTie rtDown = \once \override RepeatTie.direction = #DOWN \new PianoStaff << \new Staff = "RH" \relative { \time 2/4 \stemUp \tieUp b'8 ~ <\tweak RepeatTie.stencil ##f b fis d>4.\rt | b8 ~ 4.\rt | } \new Staff = "LH" \relative { \clef "bass" \time 2/4 << { s8 4.\rt } \\ { \tuplet 6/4 { \change Staff = RH b'='32\lv fis\lv d\lv \change Staff = LH \lvUp b\lv \lvUp fis\lv d } b4. } >> << { s8 4.\rt } \\ { \tuplet 6/4 { \change Staff = RH b'='32\lv ais\lv g\lv \change Staff = LH \lvUp b,\lv \lvUp ais\lv g } b,4. }>> } >> %% I am attaching a pdf of the output, but I'm not sure whether it will make it through to the list. The intention of the notation is clear, I think, but there are 2 things wrong with this output. 1) There should not be a RepeatTie on the top note of the right-hand chords, nor should there be a LaissezVibrerTie on the first note of the bar. 2) In the second bar chord, the RepeatTie on the A# of the left hand chord is too close to the LaissezVibrerTie on the G. The best solution here would be for the LaissezVibrerTie to be inverted. 3) Also in the second bar the RepeatTie on the right hand A# needs to curve downwards to match the LaissezVibrerTie on the earlier A#. The would look a bit strange, but probably not as strange as inverting the LVTie. I have experimented with the material at http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=714 I can certainly solve any problems with the LVTies using this snippet, but my attempts to adapt it to produce something similar for RepeatTies have not been successful. Another approach would, of course, be to tie each note of the sextuplet directly to the note in the following chord. I have not tried this because I don't know how it can be done. Also I think that it might look over-cluttered, and that the original notation is perhaps better. Can anyone offer pointers or a solution? David test.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing between Staff Groups
Peter Gentry wrote > How does one control the vertical space between staff groups. I can see > how > to modify the vertical spacing of staves within a Staff Group but not > between Staff Groups on a page. > > > > The answer may lie in page layout but that is as far as I can get. A > search > in the archives has not revealed a solution. Thanks in advance for any > pointers to the answer. > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user My previous post was meant to reference this link here, sorry! This I believe is what you are looking for, regarding spacing /between/ groups? http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/flexible-vertical-spacing-within-systems#spacing-of-grouped-staves - composer | sound designer | asmr artist LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Spacing-between-Staff-Groups-tp199352p199359.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Spacing between Staff Groups
Peter Gentry wrote > How does one control the vertical space between staff groups. I can see > how > to modify the vertical spacing of staves within a Staff Group but not > between Staff Groups on a page. > > > > The answer may lie in page layout but that is as far as I can get. A > search > in the archives has not revealed a solution. Thanks in advance for any > pointers to the answer. > > > ___ > lilypond-user mailing list > lilypond-user@ > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Hi Peter, Does this do what you are looking for, if I understand your question? \override StaffGrouper.staffgroup-staff-spacing.basic-distance = #20 (i.e. VerticalAxisGroup properties: staff-staff-spacing StaffGrouper properties: staff-staff-spacing staffgroup-staff-spacing ) - composer | sound designer | asmr artist LilyPond Tutorials (for beginners) --> http://bit.ly/bcl-lilypond -- View this message in context: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Spacing-between-Staff-Groups-tp199352p199357.html Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: brittenPhrygolydian
On 18.01.2017 23:51, Thomas Morley wrote: Non-default scales are always user defined. How could we predict them? P.e. some FLAT/SHARP-combinations will collide others not... Which is why any automatic approach will have to involve horizontal skylines, as David N. already said. Best, Simon ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Back in the Pond
"Trevor Daniels"writes: > David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM > >> it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up >> somewhat shortlived. > > Really sorry to hear that, but it's great to have you back! > >> So for the short time range, I am again dependent >> on support by other LilyPond lovers. > > I'll definitely turn on my financial contribution again. Very much appreciated. >> So what's next on my agenda? >> >> One somewhat long-standing goal was to remove LilyPond's own >> implementation of a Rational data type and replace it by one based on >> Guile's arbitrary-precision arithmetic. > > Worthwhile, but best left for 2.21 I think. Well, the 2.20 release stoppers of course should be tackled. Step 1 IIRC was to contact the persons last having worked on three issues you identified. Uhm, I'd be glad to leave that in Graham's hand, at least until it's clear that addressing those issues will have to be done by somebody else. And the Moment/Rational/Midi-gc stuff is already in reasonable state of progress in private branches so I don't want to let it get cold. But of course it is an open question whether it makes sense to admit it into 2.20.0 (or was the first version 2.20.1). More likely than not, not. So that already gives an incentive for branching off the 2.20 release branch very soon. >> I am glad that I'll be able to provide technical support and >> expertise at least for a while and thus hopefully help Graham pick up >> the reins of the overall project governance a bit better. > > Excellent! > >> And, of course, this is an opportunity to try putting out the 2.20 >> release finally. > > Definitely the top priority, IMO. > >> But at any rate, I hope to be on board at least for making LilyPond 2.20 >> a thing. > > :) > > Trevor -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Spacing between Staff Groups
How does one control the vertical space between staff groups. I can see how to modify the vertical spacing of staves within a Staff Group but not between Staff Groups on a page. The answer may lie in page layout but that is as far as I can get. A search in the archives has not revealed a solution. Thanks in advance for any pointers to the answer. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Back in the Pond
Trevor wrote: > I'll definitely turn on my financial contribution again. > what's the better way to give a financial contribution? g. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Back in the Pond
David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM > it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up somewhat shortlived. Really sorry to hear that, but it's great to have you back! > So for the short time range, I am again dependent > on support by other LilyPond lovers. I'll definitely turn on my financial contribution again. > So what's next on my agenda? > > One somewhat long-standing goal was to remove LilyPond's own > implementation of a Rational data type and replace it by one based on > Guile's arbitrary-precision arithmetic. Worthwhile, but best left for 2.21 I think. > I am glad that I'll be able to provide technical support and expertise > at least for a while and thus hopefully help Graham pick up the reins of > the overall project governance a bit better. Excellent! > And, of course, this is an opportunity to try putting out the 2.20 > release finally. Definitely the top priority, IMO. > But at any rate, I hope to be on board at least for making LilyPond 2.20 > a thing. :) Trevor ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Back in the Pond
Hi fellow ponders, it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up somewhat shortlived. Long story short, I was not able to convincingly make a weekly commute, part home-office, and very Windows-centric workflows (and using rather unflexible version control) and a focus on shortlived code (rather than the multiple-decade timespan projects that LilyPond, TeX, and Emacs sport) combine with a competitive amount of immediately visible productivity. This was actually not as much an opportunity I had myself actively sought out but rather an interview a friend of mine had arranged because my finances were not really working out with LilyPond. I don't quite know where to go from here, so I'm pretty sure to be around at least for February back in the Pond, and I'll probably take a look at what options we have to divert donations through the FSF. They take a 10 percent cut, but they also handle credit card processing and other stuff, and of course there would be no need to notify people in case I left again: the project obviously could somewhat comfortably revert to making use of money independently in order to pay for some long-standing coding projects. Of course, going via the FSF and a project-specific fund would mean that we would need some sort of mechanism to actually decide what to use the money for. I have been not overly successful in providing regular accountability to my personal supporters, so it remains to be seen how I would fare with more visible requirements to reports. While my short excursion into more regular work places has provided a short breath of relief financially, those were also offset by a number of acquisitions made both for immediate needs connected with having to maintain two households as well as making some long-required or desired acquisitions not previously deemed affordable. The long and the short of it is that I'll not be able to, say, hold out half a year until other financial arrangements catch hold. And I don't really have a view on how much of a positive difference routing part of LilyPond financing through the FSF could have. So for the short time range, I am again dependent on support by other LilyPond lovers. Sorry for turning on dime again here. So what's next on my agenda? Finishing some started work that was more or less stepped in mid-stride by my excursion into the regular workplace. One somewhat long-standing goal was to remove LilyPond's own implementation of a Rational data type and replace it by one based on Guile's arbitrary-precision arithmetic. This is a multistep endeavor. Step 1 is putting the data structures of the Midi backend under Guile garbage collection control (so far, they are just allocated in C++ and never released. It doesn't make much of an impact because the Midi data is so much less than what is used for visual typesetting, but it's disconcerting a bit). This is necessary because various timing data is stored in the Midi data structures, and using Guile rationals for that requires tieing the data structures into Guile's garbage collection. Next step is making all musical Moment data structures (optionally tied into Guile/SCM already as Simple_smob) and the occurences of the Rational data type (so far not tied to Guile at all) properly garbage-collected. Then the Rational data type needs to be replaced by a C++ wrapper for Guile's SCM data type (in order not to have to rewrite a lot of code, the Rational data type itself and its conversion functions would likely remain but be reimplemented in terms of Guile arithmetic). That would likely cater for most problems of becoming arbitrary-precision (with "arbitrary" actually meaning a few million digits). For the overwhelming number of scores, this should not make much of a difference. I expect a bit of performance impact. But nothing comparable to the Guile 2 transition (if and when we go that route eventually). With regard to Guile 2, we'll need to figure out a viable programming and communication strategy and also decide whether we rather make Guile 1.8 work privately for us. That will also have an influence on deciding how to progress technically with our MusicXML support. I am glad that I'll be able to provide technical support and expertise at least for a while and thus hopefully help Graham pick up the reins of the overall project governance a bit better. At the very least, I'll be able to get a bit on my ongoing work queue flushed out which was left in a dissatisfactorily unfinished state by my departure and which would likely have taken half to a year to clear in most parts while having a regular main job. And, of course, this is an opportunity to try putting out the 2.20 release finally. I'll take stock of how to deal with our showstoppers in that area soonish if Graham does not beat me to it: it's one of those tasks which have so many open ends that I easily lose focus, and much of it is trying to figure out the status of previous
Re: ly:make-stencil arguments question
Urs Liskawrites: > Am 19.01.2017 um 09:59 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >>> Am 18.01.2017 um 21:18 schrieb Thomas Morley: customClefStencilOne = #(ly:make-stencil `(path 0.2 ',(func 1)) >>> ... I wouldn't have ever thought of that ', combination. >>> >>> I had yet another complication because in my actual case "func" would >>> return an arbitrary number of path segments (i.e. lists) that had to be >>> flattened with >>> >>> (apply append (map l-arc (make-list l-count dir))) >> (append-map l-arc (make-list l-count dir)) > > Thank you, this seems to be the appropriate expression. > >> >> And if you need to _splice_ the result in as multiple elements rather >> than a single list expression use ,@ instead of , for the splicing. >> That removes the outer pair of parens, so to say. > > Well, in my case (for the path expression) I do need the list, so it's > perfectly sufficient now. > But just for my enlightenment: to use splicing I have to quasiquote the > expression, isn't it? It is. I mean, you have to. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Arrow on cross-staves arpeggio
On Wed, 2017-01-18 at 15:07 -0600, David Nalesnik wrote: > arpeggioArrowUp will apply to a bottom context. Rewriting its > definition (in ly/property-init.ly) will work here: > > arpeggioArrowUp = { > \revert PianoStaff.Arpeggio.stencil > \revert PianoStaff.Arpeggio.X-extent > \override PianoStaff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction = #UP > } > > Hope this helps-- > David It definitely helps! Thank you. For my better understanding, could you explain exactly what is happening here? I take it that \arpeggioArrowUp applies to a Voice context, and that somehow setting PianoStaff.connectArpeggios to #t doesn't alter this fact. But I don't understand what the 2 \reverts are doing in the new definition. What are they reverting to? Perhaps #f and 0 respectively? In the light of your reply I have now altered my file, and after a bit of experimentation I find that all I need is: \set PianoStaff.connectArpeggios = ##t \override PianoStaff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction = #UP and then \revert PianoStaff.Arpeggio.arpeggio-direction when I no longer require the arrow (which is after the first arpeggiando in this case). David S ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: ly:make-stencil arguments question
Am 19.01.2017 um 09:59 schrieb David Kastrup: > Urs Liskawrites: > >> Am 18.01.2017 um 21:18 schrieb Thomas Morley: >>> customClefStencilOne = >>> #(ly:make-stencil `(path 0.2 ',(func 1)) >> ... I wouldn't have ever thought of that ', combination. >> >> I had yet another complication because in my actual case "func" would >> return an arbitrary number of path segments (i.e. lists) that had to be >> flattened with >> >> (apply append (map l-arc (make-list l-count dir))) > (append-map l-arc (make-list l-count dir)) Thank you, this seems to be the appropriate expression. > > And if you need to _splice_ the result in as multiple elements rather > than a single list expression use ,@ instead of , for the splicing. > That removes the outer pair of parens, so to say. Well, in my case (for the path expression) I do need the list, so it's perfectly sufficient now. But just for my enlightenment: to use splicing I have to quasiquote the expression, isn't it? 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: ly:make-stencil arguments question
Urs Liskawrites: > Am 18.01.2017 um 21:18 schrieb Thomas Morley: >> >> customClefStencilOne = >> #(ly:make-stencil `(path 0.2 ',(func 1)) > > ... I wouldn't have ever thought of that ', combination. > > I had yet another complication because in my actual case "func" would > return an arbitrary number of path segments (i.e. lists) that had to be > flattened with > > (apply append (map l-arc (make-list l-count dir))) (append-map l-arc (make-list l-count dir)) And if you need to _splice_ the result in as multiple elements rather than a single list expression use ,@ instead of , for the splicing. That removes the outer pair of parens, so to say. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: ly:make-stencil arguments question
Hi Harm, thank you very much! Am 18.01.2017 um 21:18 schrieb Thomas Morley: > 2017-01-18 11:15 GMT+01:00 Urs Liska: >> >> Am 18.01.2017 um 11:13 schrieb Urs Liska: >>> See attached file which is derived from >>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Snippet?id=623. >>> >> Sorry, please *ignore* the attachment of the previous post, here's the >> correct one. >> > In > > customClefStencil = > #(ly:make-stencil > `(path 0.2 > `(rmoveto 0 0 > ... > > the second ` is unneeded ' would work as well. OK, I had realized that already (the ` came from the LSR snippet), but that didn't help me further because ... > > > To insert a function, unquote the function-call, and quote the result: > > func = > #(define-scheme-function (val)(number?) > (list > 'rmoveto 0 0 > 'rcurveto 0 (+ 0.75 val) 1 (+ 0.75 val) 1 0 > 'rcurveto 0 (- -0.75 val) -1 (- -0.75 val) -1 0)) > > > customClefStencilOne = > #(ly:make-stencil `(path 0.2 ',(func 1)) ... I wouldn't have ever thought of that ', combination. I had yet another complication because in my actual case "func" would return an arbitrary number of path segments (i.e. lists) that had to be flattened with (apply append (map l-arc (make-list l-count dir))) with l-arc being the function and l-count being an argument how often this arc has to be generated. Thanks a lot, *this* topic is solved now (more to come ;-) ) Best Urs > (cons -0.5 1) > (cons -3 5)) > > customClefOne = \override Staff.Clef.stencil = \customClefStencilOne > > \relative c' { > \customClefOne > \clef "alto" > c1 > } > > > HTH, > Harm -- 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