On 07/02/17 14:33, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Wols, > >> Before then :-) - some time last century :-) > > Is there anyone on the list who can verify when this was a problem? i.e., > which version it stopped being a problem. > I’m seriously curious! > >> I started using lily with 2.4, and I was forever cursing that "feature”. > > Hmm… I started with 2.1, and I honestly don’t remember having this problem!
It was probably "work-around-able" back then, I just couldn't do it. I think I was probably pointed at stuff, but iirc it was along the lines of "write this code that's a mix of lilypond and scheme and it'll work" and I just couldn't get my head round it. I can be a bit grumpy at times as I'm sure you well know :-) and for something as basic as multiple marks on a barline, well I know I did get very grumpy over it! :-) Not helped, of course, because almost invariably I wanted to combine another mark with \mark \default, and even now I find Scheme a bit frightening :-) At heart I'm a "database and C/FORTRAN" guy, so lily's internals are another world :-) > >> I thought you wrote the code that sorted it. > > Definitely not (though I wish I could write Lilypond at that level!). You are > probably thinking of the syntactic sugar I’ve sprinkled on the list over the > years to handle fancy tempo markings, spacing issues between \mark and \tempo > grobs, etc. > Almost certainly. And I'm extremely grateful for it :-) - it's turned what I considered almost a show-stopper problem into something that's relatively simple (if you can say that about any complex formatting in lily :-) > Cheers, > Kieren. Cheers, Wol _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
