2009/10/13 Maximilian Albert <[email protected]>:
> Awesome, thanks for your work, Neil! Just one question: Why is it
> necessary to explicitly specify the \breakDynamicSpan command?
I was just following Han-Wen's suggestion in the bug tracker; it
hadn't crossed my mind that it would be useful to have automatic
breaking based on direction.
> As a
> user, I would normally not include it since I'm not aware of it and
> would thus think that manual positioning of hairpins simply doesn't
> work (or is buggy). Is there a way to avoid it (e.g., by having
> Lilypond automatically detect when two hairpins point in different
> directions)?
I'm sure it's feasible, though it's going to increase the complexity
somewhat due to the necessity of caching the previous direction. I'll
see what I can do.
Bear in mind though that an explicit command is necessary for
situations where the direction doesn't change (for example, the last
dynamic in the regression test).
> Also, is there a way to 'activate' \breakDynamicSpan
> somehow so that it applies to all future hairpins/dynamics?
It might be possible to redefine dynamic commands to send a break
request automatically, though there is one limitation due to the way
the engraver's coded: you can't have separate alignments for the case
where there's an absolute dynamic directly followed by a span dynamic.
For example, the following snippet wouldn't produce separate alignment
spanners for the forte and hairpin:
\relative c' {
c1_\f^\<
c1\!
}
Regards,
Neil
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
