Wols Lists <[email protected]> writes: > On 28/01/18 20:09, David Kastrup wrote: >> Wol's lists <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> I've just tried to do a cut-n-paste into a piece of music, from >>> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/notation/bars >>> >>> At the very bottom you'll find >>> >>> \relative c' { >>> c1 \mark \markup { \musicglyph "scripts.segno" } >>> c1 \mark \markup { \musicglyph "scripts.coda" } >>> c1 \mark \markup { \musicglyph "scripts.ufermata" } >>> c1 >>> } >>> >>> Okay, I was only copying the markup bit - I wanted it as markup in the >>> middle of the bar - but I had to add a # as follows: >>> >>> \markup { \musicglyph #"scripts.coda" } >>> >>> Looking at the code behind the web page, it looks like that is >>> correct, so this is really just a curious enquiry - why is the # >>> required if I want a markup, but it's not required if it's a markup >>> within a mark ??? >> >> Different versions. It's just recently that you could write strings >> within a markup without # before them. The Documentation is likely >> newer than your version of LilyPond. >> > Thank you both ... > > I'd like to run the latest version :-) but at the moment my main machine > is bit-rotting until I get the chance to build my new one...
I think I merged it into the 2.20 release branch already since the change itself (though not its consequences) is pretty confined and it is a prime candidate for a discrepancy between unstable and stable versions going to trip up relations between helpers and askers on these mailing lists. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
