Paul Scott wrote: > I don't think it's a bug > in my understanding of how Lilypond works.
It is definitely a bug. See below. Also, see the the thread in July 2004 on this list in which the developers confirmed that this is a bug. They even seem to have fixed the bug, but somehow the fix never made it into CVS. > Your example doesn't use the > chordChanges = #t feature It does use the feature. I wrote chords for all of the notes, and Lilypond decides which ones to print. Only chords changes are to be printed. That works fine throughout, except at the beginning of the second ending. There Lilypond skips the chord even though it is a change. That is the bug. My example is very short and contrived, of course. In real music there could be hundreds of places where chords are correctly skipped. > Did you try chordChanges = #f ? > I believe it will make your example do exactly > what you want. No, it is wrong. It prints chords all over the place that I do not want it to print. With chordChanges = ##t everything is correct, except in the case where the bug occurs. > Indeed I just tried it and it does exactly what > you said you wanted it > to. To be exact the following works: No, your example does not do what I want. I want Lilypond only to print chord changes. Your example prints chords even when they are not changes. Lilypond's chordChanges feature works great for that. Except that I am reminding the Lilypond team that there is still a bug in the case I pointed out. _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
