Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Comment #6 on issue 898 by v.villenave: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 David's suggestion is now to be found in Issue 994. -- You received this message because you are listed in the own

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 7:21 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Ping? Yep, thanks. Cheers, Valentin ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

David Kastrup writes: > lilyp...@googlecode.com writes: > >> Comment #4 on issue 898 by v.villenave: Enhancement: rests should be >> taken into account when determining beaming intervals >> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 >> >> David, could you elaborate on that (and send a

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Updates: Status: Verified Comment #5 on issue 898 by v.villenave: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 (No comment was entered for this change.) -- You received this message because y

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

lilyp...@googlecode.com writes: > Comment #4 on issue 898 by v.villenave: Enhancement: rests should be > taken into account when determining beaming intervals > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 > > David, could you elaborate on that (and send a more complete report on > the

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Comment #4 on issue 898 by v.villenave: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 David, could you elaborate on that (and send a more complete report on the list, possibly demonstrating the reque

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Updates: Status: Fixed Comment #3 on issue 898 by Carl.D.Sorensen: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 (No comment was entered for this change.) -- You received this message because

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Updates: Labels: fixed_2_13_10 Comment #2 on issue 898 by Carl.D.Sorensen: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 This example is fixed. David's comments should probably become a new is

Re: Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Comment #1 on issue 898 by d...@gnu.org: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 It would also make sense to have an option to allow automatic beaming across rests when a note instead of a rest

Issue 898 in lilypond: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals

Status: Accepted Owner: v.villenave Labels: Type-Enhancement Priority-Medium Engraving-nitpick New issue 898 by v.villenave: Enhancement: rests should be taken into account when determining beaming intervals http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=898 The attached example shows tha