Re: Back in the Pond

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Kobel  writes:

> +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

[Johannes Roeßler]

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

[Johannes Roeßler]

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

[Nathan Ho]

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

[Rob Torop]

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

[Alexander Kobel]

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

[SoundsFromSound]

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

[Malte Meyn]

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

[SoundsFromSound]

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

[Mark Stephen Mrotek]

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: lilypond 
Subject: 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

[H. S. Teoh]

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

[Amir Teymuri]

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

[Peter Gentry]

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

[David Nalesnik]

Hi David,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 4:10 AM, David Sumbler  wrote:
> 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

[Klaus Blum]

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

[David Sumbler]

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

[David Sumbler]

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

[SoundsFromSound]

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

[soundsfromso...@gmail.com]

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

[Simon Albrecht]

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

[David Kastrup]

"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

[Peter Gentry]

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

[Gianmaria Lari]

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

[Trevor Daniels]

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

[David Kastrup]

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

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska  writes:

> 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

[David Sumbler]

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

[Urs Liska]

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?

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

[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))

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

[Urs Liska]

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