2017-09-15 1:11 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup <[email protected]>:
> Thomas Morley <[email protected]> writes:
>>> Frankly, what does it even _mean_ to use a
>>> particular righthand finger and string for a non-existing note?
>>
>> Well, that hold as well for:
>> { -1 -- d' }
>> but this one works.
>
> That's because historically you could do
>
> <c e g>-1-2-3
>
> and consequently _equivalently_
>
> << <c e g>
> s-1-2-3 >>
>
> either of which do the formatting differently from <c-1 e-2 g-3>, using
> the Fingering_engraver rather than the New_fingering_engraver .
>
> But this historic crap is so unrelated to issue 5181 that I am not
> interested in discussing or addressing it in this context. Issue 5181
> does not touch it.
Indeed.
I didn't intend to object, just to point to possible expectations.
Also, adding post-events to non-existing notes does not make a lot of
sense, musically speaking, yes.
But LilyPond accepts already
{ <>^.\fermata }
Ok, the output is bad, but the "does it make sense?"-argument is then
not that strong, imho.
Other 5181-topic:
In your patch description you wrote about the problem with
c-\single \dynamicUp \f
Here I can't follow, compiling this with 2.18.2 and current master
returns no noticeable difference for me, even using
display(Lily)Music.
May be I overlooked something.
Could you explain a bit more verbose?
Cheers,
Harm
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
