"Keith OHara" <[email protected]> writes: > On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 01:09:37 -0700, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 2012/06/02 07:28:37, dak wrote: >> >> It would seem that _trailing_ <> are not really something we should >> lightly suggest since it is unknown what their articulations will >> attach themselves to. >> > > I suggested it weightily. > The notations attached to <> are engraved as if they were attached to > a note starting at the musical moment of the empty chord. > > When I'm writing a decrescendo at the first beat of a measure, for > example, I know that LilyPond joins it with the next dynamic if there > is one, but stops the hairpin at the barline if I end it with \!.
I have no idea what you mean by "it", and _where_ you plan to place \!. The example wrote <>\! (and since there was no \bar "|." following, it is reasonable to expect this as an excerpt from continuing music), and if the next note starts with a dynamic, the "smorz." will merge into that dynamic which is not wanted for. > That's the right thing to do, and the docs told me how LilyPond does > it. When the note or rest that would take the \! is separated by a > double bar, key change, comments, etc., I happily type s1*0\!, or > <>\!, before the double bar, etc., and get the same correct output. No, the output is not correct. Have you even tried the examples I gave? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
