On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 21:23 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
Neil Puttock wrote:
(let* ((Arpeggio
arpeggio (or something else without the capital letter)
What's bad about the capital letter? I capitalized it because it's
a grob-name and grob-names are capitalized. Does the same problem
extend
Joe Neeman wrote:
There doesn't seem to be. As a workaround, you could add a context
property called, say, spanArpeggioInThisContext and document somewhere
that the \connectArpeggiosOn command works in the lowermost context
where spanArpeggioInThisContext is true. This preserves the ability
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 07:11 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
Joe Neeman wrote:
There doesn't seem to be. As a workaround, you could add a context
property called, say, spanArpeggioInThisContext and document somewhere
that the \connectArpeggiosOn command works in the lowermost context
where
Mark Polesky wrote:
Hopefully there are no more snafus, but I need you guys to test this.
Let me know if you find any problems. I'd like to apply this if the
developers approve.
In the file attached to the previous post
Mark Polesky wrote:
Otherwise, does this look good?
I'm sorry to keep doing this, but I keep finding ways of
improving this. Now I think users should find this very
intuitive, although the internal workings are more complex.
I've attached the most recent version, which includes an
annotated
Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com writes:
Mark Polesky wrote:
Otherwise, does this look good?
I'm sorry to keep doing this, but I keep finding ways of
improving this. Now I think users should find this very
intuitive, although the internal workings are more complex.
I've attached the
2009/8/4 Mark Polesky markpole...@yahoo.com:
Anyone have any comments/suggestions?
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but have you considered what
will happen if an innocent user adds the Span_arpeggio_engraver to the
Staff context in order to span voices on one stave?
A few nitpicks:
On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 14:01 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
Mark Polesky wrote:
Otherwise, does this look good?
I'm sorry to keep doing this, but I keep finding ways of
improving this. Now I think users should find this very
intuitive, although the internal workings are more complex.
I've
Neil Puttock wrote:
Sorry to throw a spanner in the works, but have you considered what
will happen if an innocent user adds the Span_arpeggio_engraver to the
Staff context in order to span voices on one stave?
Can you give an example that fails? (You may want to read my reply to
Joe first
Mark Polesky wrote:
Okay, this is not ready yet. I found a confusing problem. When setting
connectArpeggios to #f after it has been #t, there's some issue with
the unreverted PianoStaff stencil somehow overriding the new Voice
stencil. Or something. I'm not really sure -- it's confusing.
Oh
Mark Polesky wrote:
Interesting idea. As a first attempt, I tried making the functionality
of the \arpeggioArrowUp command dependent on the 'connectArpeggios
context property, but obviously I'm doing something wrong. Does anyone
know why this doesn't work? Can anyone see how to make this
Mark Polesky wrote:
;; not sure if the conditional tests are necessary
(if PianoStaff
(arpeggio-generic PianoStaff
`(stencil X-extent arpeggio-direction dash-definition)))
(if Staff
(arpeggio-generic Staff
`(stencil X-extent
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 18:58 -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
Mark Polesky wrote:
Interesting idea. As a first attempt, I tried making the functionality
of the \arpeggioArrowUp command dependent on the 'connectArpeggios
context property, but obviously I'm doing something wrong. Does anyone
Joe Neeman wrote:
Have you tried using ly:context-property-where-defined instead of
searching for PianoStaff explicitly? There are non-PianoStaff contexts
containing Span_arpeggio_engraver, after all. Other than that, this is a
very cool trick!
Joe,
Thanks for the tip. I rewrote
Mark Polesky wrote:
Any objections? How close is this to being acceptable? I'll wait for
approval.
Okay, this is not ready yet. I found a confusing problem. When setting
connectArpeggios to #f after it has been #t, there's some issue with
the unreverted PianoStaff stencil somehow overriding
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:42:47PM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
\arpeggioArrowUp etc. doesn't work with cross-staff arpeggios
because the arpeggio-direction property is overridden at the
Voice level, and not the PianoStaff level. To facilitate this
situation for users, I propose adding these
Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com writes:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 10:42:47PM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote:
\arpeggioArrowUp etc. doesn't work with cross-staff arpeggios
because the arpeggio-direction property is overridden at the
Voice level, and not the PianoStaff level. To facilitate this
David Kastrup wrote:
This sounds to me like giving users a low-level manual way to fudge
around a bug/design mistake. This sounds like something that should
happen automatically in most cases.
Interesting idea. As a first attempt, I tried making the functionality
of the \arpeggioArrowUp
\arpeggioArrowUp etc. doesn't work with cross-staff arpeggios
because the arpeggio-direction property is overridden at the
Voice level, and not the PianoStaff level. To facilitate this
situation for users, I propose adding these four commands to
ly/property-init.ly:
connectArpeggioArrowUp = {
19 matches
Mail list logo
