https://codereview.appspot.com/120480043/diff/100001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/120480043/diff/100001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode2747
Documentation/notation/input.itely:2747: @emph{two} @code{\score}
blocks; one for MIDI (with unfolded repeats)
On 2014/09/27 21:48:15, J_lowe wrote:
On 2014/09/27 16:53:21, marc wrote:
> this is a bit misleading IMHO:
>
> You don't need two \score blocks when using \unfoldRepeats
> but you rather need \unfoldRepeats when dealing with both printable
output and
> MIDI
OK just to confirm the example given (and so hence my misleading
wording) is
%%
\score {
... music ...
\layout { }
}
\score {
\unfoldRepeats {
... music ...
}
\midi { }
}
%%
But simply writing
%%
\score {
\unfoldRepeats {
... music ...
}
\layout { }
\midi { }
}
%%
is OK? And the 'convention' (of some I suppose) to have two score
blocks is to
simply make it easier to separate the notation part of the LilyPond
input file
from the MIDI part of the LilyPond input file?
I think so. Probably my remarks were misleading, too.
I'd rather rewrite the paragraph to something like:
In order to restrict the effect of @code{\unfoldRepeats} to the MIDI
output only
while generating printable scores as well, it is necessary to make
@emph{...
I'd read your original text as: "if I want to use \unfoldRepeats, I'll
have to
include two \score blocks",
but this is not true - in cases where you need MIDI output only, there
is no
need for a second \score.
Sorry for my rather clumsy explanations ...
https://codereview.appspot.com/120480043/
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
