On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Thomas Morley wrote:
> 2017-04-10 15:28 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
>> Harm,
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Morley
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Malte,
>>>
>>> this is offtopic:
>>>
>>> 2017-04-09 22:48 GMT+02:00 Malte Meyn :
Am 09.04.2017 um 20:53
2017-04-10 16:08 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Thomas Morley
> wrote:
>> 2017-04-10 15:28 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
>>> Harm,
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Morley
>>> wrote:
Hi Malte,
this is offtopic:
2017-04-09 22:48 G
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:39 AM, Thomas Morley wrote:
> 2017-04-10 15:28 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
>> Harm,
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Morley
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Malte,
>>>
>>> this is offtopic:
>>>
>>> 2017-04-09 22:48 GMT+02:00 Malte Meyn :
Am 09.04.2017 um 20:53
2017-04-10 15:28 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
> Harm,
>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Morley
> wrote:
>> Hi Malte,
>>
>> this is offtopic:
>>
>> 2017-04-09 22:48 GMT+02:00 Malte Meyn :
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 09.04.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Thomas Morley:
I would have expected the whole bracket
2017-04-09 22:38 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik :
> Harm,
>
> On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Thomas Morley
> wrote:
>> The following gives strange output, see attached.
>>
>> \version "2.19.58"
>>
>> {
>> \override TupletBracket.shorten-pair = #'(10 . 0)
>> \tuplet 1/1 {
>> c'1 c'1
>>
Harm,
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Thomas Morley wrote:
> Hi Malte,
>
> this is offtopic:
>
> 2017-04-09 22:48 GMT+02:00 Malte Meyn :
>>
>>
>> Am 09.04.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Thomas Morley:
>>> I would have expected the whole bracket to be (much) smaller, instead
>>> only the part of the bracke
Hi Malte,
this is offtopic:
2017-04-09 22:48 GMT+02:00 Malte Meyn :
>
>
> Am 09.04.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Thomas Morley:
>> I would have expected the whole bracket to be (much) smaller, instead
>> only the part of the bracket left from TupletNumber is affected.
>
> How do you expect any sensible o
Am 09.04.2017 um 20:53 schrieb Thomas Morley:
> I would have expected the whole bracket to be (much) smaller, instead
> only the part of the bracket left from TupletNumber is affected.
How do you expect any sensible output from that? 10 is so much that the
“left” end of the bracket is right from
Harm,
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 1:53 PM, Thomas Morley wrote:
> The following gives strange output, see attached.
>
> \version "2.19.58"
>
> {
> \override TupletBracket.shorten-pair = #'(10 . 0)
> \tuplet 1/1 {
> c'1 c'1
> }
> }
>
> I would have expected the whole bracket to be (
The following gives strange output, see attached.
\version "2.19.58"
{
\override TupletBracket.shorten-pair = #'(10 . 0)
\tuplet 1/1 {
c'1 c'1
}
}
I would have expected the whole bracket to be (much) smaller, instead
only the part of the bracket left from TupletNumber is affe
10 matches
Mail list logo
