On 2023-01-13 6:43 pm, Flaming Hakama by Elaine wrote:
Looking at your example, I think the first place you are going off is
that
you do not define the barlines using ##t, ##f, you instead put the
characters that correspond to what you want to appear in those places.
#t and #f are valid in bar
> From: David Zelinsky
> To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 17:37:15 -0500
> Subject: Re: defineBarLine confusion
> David Zelinsky writes:
>
> > I'm trying to understand how to use defineBarLine, based on the
> > documentation in Notation Reference 1.2.5, and bar-line
Jean,
Really sorry, I see your answer in the link below, thanks for all the
trouble.
You were a great help, thanks,
Raj
On 1/13/2023 3:25 PM, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
Le 14/01/2023 à 00:22, Rajesh Baskar a écrit :
Hi Jean,
I don't think I saw your response.Here is the question again - The
Le 14/01/2023 à 00:22, Rajesh Baskar a écrit :
Hi Jean,
I don't think I saw your response.Here is the question again - The
solution that you gave makes the 1st image match the width of the 2nd
image by reducing it. Can the 2nd images width match the 1st images
width by increasing it.
Wh
Le 13/01/2023 à 10:16, Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
Regardless of that, it is indeed a severe bug: No need to ever align
key signatures vertically, AFAIK. Simply left-align them.
I have opened an issue for this:
https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/6520
OpenPGP_signature
Description:
Le 13/01/2023 à 23:37, David Zelinsky a écrit :
How should I best go about conveying this to the developers?
See https://lilypond.org/bug-reports.html
Thanks,
Jean
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
David Zelinsky writes:
> I'm trying to understand how to use defineBarLine, based on the
> documentation in Notation Reference 1.2.5, and bar-line.scm. The
> meaning of the "bartype" argument seems to not be exactly explained
> anywhere, but from what is said (mostly in bar-line.scm), and a lot
On Fri 13 Jan 2023 at 19:30:29 (+), nitra...@posteo.net wrote:
> I was talking about the first note of each measures after the Key Signature.
> But you were right, it is the default spacing.
>
> About the distance between different accidentals, consider the example
> bellow. You can see a diff
> Turns out, ironically, that I am now having to add lots more bookparts so
> that garbage doesn't build up to where it triggers a third-party GC bug on
> Windows. Still waiting for that fix RSN (2.24.1++?)
LilyPond 2.24.1 is planned for the end of January or early February. Whether it
inc
Thanks Jean, really appreciate it.
On 1/13/2023 12:00 PM, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
Le 13 janv. 2023 à 20:54, Rajesh Baskar a écrit :
Hi Jean,
I would greatly appreciate if you could help me out on the below request.
Did you not receive my reply on this?
You can always find it in the list
(including lilypond-user)
On 1/12/2023 7:01 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
Hi all,
A very large part of my composition [and thus Lilypond engraving]
career is concerned with very large, multi-format musical dramas
(operas, musicals, plays-with-music, dramatic song cycles, etc.). A
typical set
> Le 13 janv. 2023 à 20:19, b...@kummelweb.nl a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> Since I upgraded tot Lilypond 2.24, I noticed that the title font changed. It
> looks much more like standard Times New Roman now, instead of the beautiful
> Lilypond text font. (See the attached images: old.png is how it us
FWIW, I just tried and with 2.24.0 mine looks just like your old.png.
This is using the linux binaries downloaded from the web site.
-David
b...@kummelweb.nl writes:
> Hi,
>
> Since I upgraded tot Lilypond 2.24, I noticed that the title font
> changed. It looks much more like standard Times Ne
I was talking about the first note of each measures after the Key Signature.
But you were right, it is the default spacing.
About the distance between different accidentals, consider the example
bellow. You can see a difference between the "Reference staff" and number
"C" in the "Corrected Output"
Hi,
Since I upgraded tot Lilypond 2.24, I noticed that the title font
changed. It looks much more like standard Times New Roman now, instead
of the beautiful Lilypond text font. (See the attached images: old.png
is how it used to be, new.png is after upgrading to 2.24.)
I can't find anything
On Fri 13 Jan 2023 at 11:58:42 (+), nitra...@posteo.net wrote:
> Yes it is better, thank you for your fast reply. But several problems are
> still there in my opinion:
>
> - The first note of the measure doesn't align with the last accidental and
> is still too far.
None of the first notes
Le 10/01/2023 à 22:17, Jean Abou Samra a écrit :
In order to increase the bus factor, I would like to
nominate one or two other regulars as admins. If you
feel like it, please let me know.
Thanks to Mark Knoop for accepting this task. He is now a co-admin.
Best,
Jean
OpenPGP_signature
Des
Yes it is better, thank you for your fast reply. But several problems are
still there in my opinion:
- The first note of the measure doesn't align with the last accidental and
is still too far.
- I don't understand why the distance between different accidentals is
wider (for instance between a
Le 12/01/2023 à 05:44, Rajesh Baskar a écrit :
Hi Jean,
Thanks for your help this works. But I have a question, this solution
makes the 1st image match the width of the 2nd image by reducing it.
Can the 2nd images width match the 1st images width by increasing it.
Try
\version "2.24.0"
Le 13/01/2023 à 10:16, Werner LEMBERG a écrit :
I just discovered this huge bug in the recent release of 2.24.0
which wasn't in the previous version.
What previous version did you test this with? For me, the output is
the same in 2.22 and in 2.18.2.
Regardless of that, it is indeed a severe bug
You're right, I worked for my last score on 2.22.0 and the bug was there and I
didn't notice it... So it isn't specific to 2.22.4 as written in the
subject.
Le vendredi 13 janvier 2023 à 09:17, Jean Abou Samra a écrit :
> Le 13/01/2023 à 09:34, nitra...@posteo.net a écrit :
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I
>> I just discovered this huge bug in the recent release of 2.24.0
>> which wasn't in the previous version.
>
> What previous version did you test this with? For me, the output is
> the same in 2.22 and in 2.18.2.
Regardless of that, it is indeed a severe bug: No need to ever align
key signatur
Le 13/01/2023 à 09:34, nitra...@posteo.net a écrit :
Hi all,
I just discovered this huge bug in the recent release of 2.24.0 which
wasn't in the previous version.
What previous version did you test this with? For me, the output is the
same in 2.22 and in 2.18.2.
Best,
Jean
OpenPGP_signat
Hi all,
I just discovered this huge bug in the recent release of 2.24.0 which
wasn't in the previous version. Placement of key signatures on multiple
staves with transposed instrument behaves very poorly. Consider this
example :
\version "2.24.0"
music = \relative c' {
\key es\major
c d e f
24 matches
Mail list logo
