2013/6/11 David Kastrup <[email protected]>: > Timothy Lanfear <[email protected]> writes: > >>> I'm not top posting. >> > >> \version "2.17.20" >> >> \layout { \accidentalStyle neo-modern } >> >> \relative c' { >> <cis eis gis>1 >> <\single \omit Accidental c e \single \omit Accidental g>1 >> } > >> If I suppress some accidentals of a chord with \single \omit (which will >> make sense in the context of the score I am setting), the remaining >> accidentals are placed as if the suppressed accidentals are still present. >> Is this the expected behaviour? > > My vote would be on "no". It would be expected behavior if you had used > \single\hide instead of \single\omit. > > Not all code deals gracefully with \omit. It would be my suspicion that > using unusual fonts or scaled accidentals would then also prove > problematic, so just special-casing the stencil = ##f condition might > not be sufficient for dealing with all stencil-related special cases. > > At any rate, it may be a low-priority problem, but it can reasonably be > called a bug as it violates expectations. > > -- > David Kastrup > > > _______________________________________________ > lilypond-user mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
