strange `break-align-symbols` behaviour

[Werner LEMBERG]

Please consider this example.

```tex
\version "2.25.11"

music = {
  c'1
  \tempo "T-note" c'1
}

\markup { time-signature }
{
  \override Score.MetronomeMark.break-align-symbols =
#'(time-signature)
  \music
}

\markup { time-signature, key-signature }
{
  \override Score.MetronomeMark.break-align-symbols =
#'(time-signature key-signature)
  \music
}

\paper {
  ragged-right = ##f
}
```

I don't understand why the addition of `key-signature` to the
`break-align-symbols` list makes 'T-note' left-align to the bar line —
there is no key signature at this point, right?  IMHO, the correct
behaviour would be that 'T-note' is still aligned to the note.

What am I missing?


Werner

Re: Inline attachments Re: Slur within a slur?

[Jean Abou Samra]

> I do see the attachment, it's just not displayed in the text of the message. 
> I'm using GMail and I'm not in Plain Text mode.  I see images inline with
> other emails, just not David Kastrup's. 

Most people send HTML email, which can contain inline images as HTML code
(technically: an  tag with src pointing to the attachment grouped into the
same multipart/related). David sends plain text email, in which the only way to
have inline images is to split the email text in two with the image in the
middle (technically: break the message body into several MIME parts linked by
multipart/mixed). AFAIK, this is relatively unusual; I'm not surprised that some
mail clients don't display it in the nicest way possible.




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Inline attachments Re: Slur within a slur?

[Knute Snortum]

On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 8:03 AM David Wright 
wrote:

> The problem must be on your side, unless you're subscribed to the
> text-only version of the digest that comes with no attachments.
> If your MUA doesn't display the image inline, you should be able
> to display or save it just like any normal attachment.
>

I do see the attachment, it's just not displayed in the text of the
message.  I'm using GMail and I'm not in Plain Text mode.  I see images
inline with other emails, just not David Kastrup's.

It's not a big deal.  I just need to remember it when I'm replying.

--
Knute Snortum

Inline attachments Re: Slur within a slur?

[David Wright]

On Sun 03 Dec 2023 at 06:05:31 (-0800), Knute Snortum wrote:
> 
> Ah, yes, I see it now!  There is some problem between your email reader to
> mine where I don't see inline attachments. So I only saw:
> 
> "gives me
> 
> 
> and a bar check warning."
> 
> Which I wrongly interpreted as "gives me a bar check warning."

The problem must be on your side, unless you're subscribed to the
text-only version of the digest that comes with no attachments.
If your MUA doesn't display the image inline, you should be able
to display or save it just like any normal attachment.

Those reading the text-only digest should see:

  gives me

  -- next part --
  A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
  Name: xxx.preview.png
  Type: image/png
  Size: 7971 bytes
  Desc: not available
  URL: 

  -- next part --

  and a bar check warning.

Unfortunately, that URL might not work:

  $ wget 
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/attachments/20231202/6237e5d4/attachment.png
  --2023-12-03 09:20:47--  
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/attachments/20231202/6237e5d4/attachment.png
  Resolving lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org)... 209.51.188.17, 2001:470:142::17
  Connecting to lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org)|209.51.188.17|:443... connected.
  HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found
  2023-12-03 09:20:48 ERROR 404: Not Found.
  $ 

just as it didn't in 2019:

  https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2019-07/msg00208.html

or 2016 (report attached to that post).

Cheers,
David.

Re: Slur within a slur?

[Knute Snortum]

On Sun, Dec 3, 2023 at 2:10 AM David Kastrup  wrote:

> Knute Snortum  writes:
>
> > On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 6:44 AM Peter Mayes  wrote:
> >
> >> Here is a fragment of something I am engraving.
> >>
> >>   e( dis e ais, b g |
> >>   e8) r \afterGrace d'!(\trill { cis32 d }  |
> >>   c'!16) b^. a^. g^. fis^. e^. |
> >>
> >> The D following the \afterGrace is slurred up to the C at the beginning
> of
> >> the following bar.
> >>
> >> I would also like the "{ cis32 d }" grace notes to be slurred, but if I
> >> put "{ cis32( d) }", I get a "Warning: already have slur".
> >>
> >> Is there a way to get a "slur within a slur"?
> >>
> > When we ask for a MWE, the "w" stands for "working".  That is, you should
> > be able to copy and paste the LilyPond source and get it to engrave.  You
> > can't do that with your code, thus David Kastrup's reply.
>
> It was probably easy to overlook, but my reply did contain the requested
> functionality.
>

Ah, yes, I see it now!  There is some problem between your email reader to
mine where I don't see inline attachments. So I only saw:

"gives me


and a bar check warning."

Which I wrongly interpreted as "gives me a bar check warning."

--
Knute Snortum

Re: Slur within a slur?

[David Kastrup]

Knute Snortum  writes:

> On Sat, Dec 2, 2023 at 6:44 AM Peter Mayes  wrote:
>
>> Here is a fragment of something I am engraving.
>>
>>   e( dis e ais, b g |
>>   e8) r \afterGrace d'!(\trill { cis32 d }  |
>>   c'!16) b^. a^. g^. fis^. e^. |
>>
>> The D following the \afterGrace is slurred up to the C at the beginning of
>> the following bar.
>>
>> I would also like the "{ cis32 d }" grace notes to be slurred, but if I
>> put "{ cis32( d) }", I get a "Warning: already have slur".
>>
>> Is there a way to get a "slur within a slur"?
>>
> When we ask for a MWE, the "w" stands for "working".  That is, you should
> be able to copy and paste the LilyPond source and get it to engrave.  You
> can't do that with your code, thus David Kastrup's reply.

It was probably easy to overlook, but my reply did contain the requested
functionality.  The output was not exactly pretty in most other regards.
I was both answering the question as well as making a point about the
example code.

Sometimes I don't answer questions at all because I am not in the mood
to write a complete example myself for the sake of someone else.  In
this case, I decided to just go with what was given and in that manner
show that a better prepared question would have made for a better
recognizable answer.

The actual recipient of the answer did get the solution.  It just
appears that I confused other readers.

Sorry for that.

-- 
David Kastrup