Issue [#3037] fixed the problem with line breaks, so is there any remaining
reason why this would be considered necessary? It doesn’t seem like the
functionality of tuplet brackets is serving ligature brackets badly, and why
reinvent the wheel?
---
** [issues:#823] Enhancement: reimplement ligature brackets using a more
appropriate interface**
**Status:** Accepted
**Created:** Mon Aug 03, 2009 09:58 AM UTC by Anonymous
**Last Updated:** Wed Aug 05, 2009 11:18 AM UTC
**Owner:** nobody
*Originally created by:* *anonymous
*Originally created by:* [v.villenave](http://code.google.com/u/v.villenave/)
*Originally owned by:* [v.villenave](http://code.google.com/u/v.villenave/)
% So far, ligature brackets are printed \(mis\)using the
% tuplet-bracket-interface instead of the line-spanner-interface.
% This prevents ligatures from being printed after a line break:
\version "2.13.3"
\paper\{ ragged-right=\#\#t \}
\relative c' \{
c2 \\\[d2 \break
e2\\\] e2
\}
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because [email protected] is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
