Hi James,
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 4:14 PM, James <pkx1...@gmail.com> wrote: [...] > > What I have found is that if you use lilypond-book (which is what the > documentation uses) I don't get the expected output but with lilypond in a > *.ly file I do. > > If you are unfamiliar with how doc works in that sense, create a file > called foo.tely and it has the content of > > --snip-- > > \input texinfo @node Top > @top > > > @lilypond[ragged-right,quote] > > #(define (my-callback grob) > > (let* ( > > ;; have we been split? > > (orig (ly:grob-original grob)) > > ;; if yes, get the split pieces (our siblings) > > (siblings (if (ly:grob? orig) > > (ly:spanner-broken-into orig) > > '()))) > > (if (and (>= (length siblings) 2) > > (eq? (car (last-pair siblings)) grob)) > > '(-2 . 5)))) > > > \relative c'' { > > \override Tie.extra-offset = #my-callback > > c1 ~ \break > > c2 ~ c > > } > @end lilypond > > > @bye > > --snip-- > > Then run > > lilypond-book --pdf foo.tely && texi2pdf foo.texi && evince foo.pdf > > I use this to check and create simple examples, snippets and the like. > > I get the same result as you do when I run the above code. However, the moved tie also disappears when I substitute the code of the original doc example in the template you give. I don't know much about lilypond-book, but I assume this happens because each line is treated individually, then linked together to form the whole. 'extra-offset doesn't affect a system's dimensions, which is what determines the image size. That vertical offset moves the tie out of the system and into oblivion. This is pretty clear from the attached image. I used the example in the documentation, changing the pair to '(2 . 2.8). The tie is cut off at the system's extent. I don't know enough about how the documentation examples are processed to understand why this doesn't happen there too. --David
_______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond