Martin Tarenskeen wrote Monday, August 31, 2015 10:50 AM
> Try to compile the following example:
>
> %%%%
>
> \version "2.19.25"
>
> \relative {
> d''-.( d-. d-. d-.)
> d-_( d-_ d-_ d-_)
> d--( d-- d-- d--)
> d-^( d-^ d-^ d-^)
> d-+( d-+ d-+ d-+)
> d-!( d-! d-! d-!)
> d->( d-> d-> d->)
> \break
> \override Slur.outside-staff-priority = #500
> d-.( d-. d-. d-.)
> d-_( d-_ d-_ d-_)
> d--( d-- d-- d--)
> d-^( d-^ d-^ d-^)
> d-+( d-+ d-+ d-+)
> d-!( d-! d-! d-!)
> d->( d-> d-> d->)
> }
>
> %%%%
>
> Why are the articulations in bars 2, 7, 9, 14 treated differently? It
> seems they are aligned with the slurs instead of the notes. Should I
> forward this to bug-lilypond?
It does look somewhat inconsistent.
The properties of the various articulations (Script objects)
are defined in scm/script.scm. Maybe one or two are sub-optimal.
Copying to bug list for further discussion.
Trevor
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
