Hi Jay,
Some minor changes would be needed if a break is needed
mid-measure (something like \lineBreakAt 27 3/4).
Yes. As I understand it, some less minor changes would be needed for that, too:
currently (AFAIK), Lily won’t break mid-measure without an explicit \bar “”.
I think I'd still
How would it behave if \draftSkip were, instead of being changed, tagged, and
you ran lilypond with exclude-tag #draft? (I can't remember the syntax off the
top of my head, but I think that's reasonably close.)
On Dec 27, 2013, at 1:38 AM, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
On Thu, 26
Hi all,
How would it behave if \draftSkip were, instead of being changed, tagged, and
you ran lilypond with exclude-tag #draft? (I can't remember the syntax off
the top of my head, but I think that's reasonably close.)
It would be fine… but it’s still a band-aid (um, Band-Aid™) solution.
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
Hi all,
How would it behave if \draftSkip were, instead of being changed,
tagged, and you ran lilypond with exclude-tag #draft? (I can't
remember the syntax off the top of my head, but I think that's
reasonably close.)
It would be
Hi David,
A content-independent line- and page-breaking system is easy.
The content is what makes it complicated…
Ah, the semantics cop is on the beat. ;)
Let me put it another way: Using David’s engraver (which he graciously sent me
off-list), I am happily adding manual breaks EXTERNAL TO
Further to this thread…
I just think it — or something like it — should be vetted and [the
improved/approved version] included with the regular distro.
I think the “perfect” break-engraver would admit coding like the following
(pseudocode; all numbers in measures):
\lineBreakAt 27
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Kieren MacMillan
kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote:
I think the “perfect” break-engraver would admit coding like the following
(pseudocode; all numbers in measures):
\lineBreakAt 27
\lineBreaksAt (12 28 34 48)
\noLineBreaks (27-30)
Hi Keith,
(Sorry for the delay in responding: ice storm + holidays = crazy times.)
YES! This works wonderfully.
I look forward to stress-testing this in the very near future.
Thank you,
Kieren.
On Dec 22, 2013, at 4:35 PM, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
Let's try it out, then, using
On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 18:44:56 -0800, Kieren MacMillan
kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote:
I look forward to stress-testing this in the very near future.
One missing feature is that \mergeSkips doesn't look inside {...} to see if
they are empty. I often set breaks for proofreading and then
On 22 Dec 2013, at 06:56, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
I also support this request. Another reason is that in many parts of
percussion instruments, say, there is `tacet' for a very long time,
e.g. from rehearsal number 20 to 76. A potential new implementation
of \compressFullBarRests
On Sunday, December 22, 2013 5:07:11 PM HKT, Simon Bailey wrote:
I also support this request. Another reason is that in many parts of
percussion instruments, say, there is `tacet' for a very long time,
e.g. from rehearsal number 20 to 76. A potential new implementation
of \compressFullBarRests
I also support this request. Another reason is that in many parts
of percussion instruments, say, there is `tacet' for a very long
time, e.g. from rehearsal number 20 to 76. A potential new
implementation of \compressFullBarRests (or a variant as suggested
by David K.) should allow
- Original Message -
From: Simon Bailey si...@bailey.at
To: Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org
Cc: jamshar...@gmail.com, lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:07:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)
On 22 Dec 2013, at 06:56, Werner LEMBERG
I would like to echo Simon's concern as well. Furthermore, I don't
see why:
R1*2 R1*2
...producing two multimeasure rests of two measures duration is
troublesome.
It is a fundamental problem of separating contents from layout. In
many cases it is of great importance to structure the
- Original Message -
From: Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org
To: bobr...@centrum.is
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:53:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)
I would like to echo Simon's concern as well. Furthermore, I don't
I think one of the things that bothers me about this thread is that
I don't understand why, if you want a four measure rest you would
write 2+2. For the vast majority of cases, if there are 48 bars
between two rehearsal marks I'm happy to see |=48=| between them.
So, why write anything but
That could be a useful feature but should not me the default. Perhaps an
override such as
\override MultimeasureRest #'condense-all = ##t
would be helpful. That way the default would still be the intuitive way (2+2
gives two separate groups) whereas the other is still an option for those who
Hi David,
I don't understand why, if you want a four measure rest you would
write 2+2. For the vast majority of cases, if there are 48 bars
between two rehearsal marks I'm happy to see |=48=| between them.
So, why write anything but R1*48 in the part in question?
You can write R1*48 in
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmillan at sympatico.ca writes:
You can write R1*48 in the *part*, but if a shared variable (say, a
global with other changes in it) is simultaneous-ed with it, the R1*48 gets
broken by Lilypond. This is what I'm trying to avoid.
Let's try it out, then, using music
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmillan at sympatico.ca writes:
I don't understand why, if you want a four measure rest you would
write 2+2. For the vast majority of cases, if there are 48 bars between
two rehearsal marks I'm happy to see |=48=| between them. So, why write
anything but R1*48 in
Hello all,
Consider this snippet:
\version 2.17.97
theMusic = {
\compressFullBarRests
R1*2
R1*2
}
\score {
\theMusic
}
Here’s my request: I would love it if \compressFullBarRests actually did what
it says it does… ;)
See
I don't see what's wrong with the output, that's exactly what I would
expect it to be.
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Kieren MacMillan
kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote:
Hello all,
Consider this snippet:
\version 2.17.97
theMusic = {
\compressFullBarRests
R1*2
R1*2
}
Hi Alex,
I don't see what's wrong with the output, that's exactly what I would expect
it to be.
Does your output show a single four-measure MMR (which I would both want and
expect it to be), or two two-measure MMRs (which is undesirable, primarily
because it's distracting to the performer)?
Two separate ones. As an orchestral performer those breaks are often used
to signify the beginnings of sections to make counting easier, so if I'm
resting and there are 8 bars of one theme followed by 8 of another, I find
it much easier to keep my place when it's 8 and 8 instead of 16.
Alex
On
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
Having just engraved nearly 25 minutes of music resulting in 57
different individual parts, I can tell you that this issue inspired
quite a bit of reduced efficiency, increased hackery, and even some
loud swearing. =)
Thoughts?
I have
Hi Alex,
Two separate ones. As an orchestral performer those breaks are often used to
signify the beginnings of sections to make counting easier, so if I'm resting
and there are 8 bars of one theme followed by 8 of another, I find it much
easier to keep my place when it's 8 and 8 instead
Hi David,
I have quite a few orchestra parts where multimeasure rest streaks of
several lengths are _not_ conflated. Basically, each such rest stands
for a recognizable unit.
I’ll look at Gould to see what her recommendations are.
In any case, whether or not a best practice is known, the
I agree that in that case it should be fully compressed, but not in the
first example.
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Kieren MacMillan
kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca wrote:
Hi Alex,
Two separate ones. As an orchestral performer those breaks are often
used to signify the beginnings of
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
Hi David,
I have quite a few orchestra parts where multimeasure rest streaks of
several lengths are _not_ conflated. Basically, each such rest stands
for a recognizable unit.
I’ll look at Gould to see what her recommendations are.
Hi David,
Well, you would not count. Instead you'd say something like
\R-until \atMark 8
or
\R-until \atmeasure 80
Ah! I could see that being a *very* elegant solution for that problem.
However, if one suddenly added, post-hoc, a “split point” in the [shared]
global music, would it
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca writes:
Hi David,
Well, you would not count. Instead you'd say something like
\R-until \atMark 8
or
\R-until \atmeasure 80
Ah! I could see that being a *very* elegant solution for that problem.
However, if one suddenly added, post-hoc, a
Hi David,
split points would require a different signaling/wait framework.
While I appreciate the ingenuity here… ;)
Consider if this is how auto-beaming were implemented — yuck.
Instead, we have \noBeam to break any automatic beam.
Why not do the same here?
i.e., Make \compressFullBarRests
Kieren MacMillan kieren_macmillan at sympatico.ca writes:
Hello all,
Consider this snippet:
\version 2.17.97
theMusic = {
\compressFullBarRests
R1*2
R1*2
}
\score {
\theMusic
}
Here’s my request: I would love it if \compressFullBarRests actually did
what it says it
James Harkins jamshark70 at gmail.com writes:
FWIW, I agree with Kieren. If I saw a part with some multimeasure rests
broken for no obvious reason, e.g.
{ \compressFullBarRests \mark \default R1*2 R1*2 \mark \default R1*2 }
I would think the publisher was insane or incompetent. I'm
I agree entirely with James that the input looks good as is. Only
tangentially related, does the placement of the first mark bother anyone
else? I feel like it would look better after rather than over the clef.
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 9:42 PM, James Harkins jamshar...@gmail.com wrote:
James
Here’s my request: I would love it if \compressFullBarRests actually did
what it says it does… ;)
FWIW, I agree with Kieren. If I saw a part with some multimeasure
rests broken for no obvious reason, e.g.
{ \compressFullBarRests \mark \default R1*2 R1*2 \mark \default R1*2 }
I would
36 matches
Mail list logo
