David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org> writes: > I think the solution would be to replace the presumably existing list of > "currently altered accidentals" not by an empty list but rather by a > list where every such accidental is replaced with a non-existing "dirty" > accidental.
That sounds right. I'll add a note to the bug tracker report, pointing to this suggestion. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
