Jim Long <[email protected]> writes: > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:19:33AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> I was just pointing out that LilyPond's default is not all-lunatic. > > I'd like to eat some crow, as it seems I'm the lunatic in this > thread for which I must apologize.
I was not stating that LilyPond's default was the best it could be (or even intentionally the way it is), merely that the notion "this is totally wrong" is exaggerated. > My interest in this issue of implicit open-repeat bars could be > addressed with an override ability for repeats beginning at the > start of a piece or at a double bar. Like Werner, I too was > unaware of the double-bar aspect of the rule for repeats. > Perhaps this could be overridden only when needed, or set > globally for a given context where it is wanted. I am not sure whether an explicit repeat sign should not be the default here, particularly at a line break. But that does not mean that it should be the only possible option. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
