Re: Tie settings question

On 10/25/16 1:48 PM, "Karol Majewski" wrote: > >So there should be fourth condition but I have no idea how to put it in >scheme. I need somethong like: > >(if (> dot-position notehead-position)) // if dot is placed higher than >notehead >(if (< dot-position notehead-position)) //

Re: Augmentation dot positioning

On 10/25/16 8:57 AM, "Chris Yate" wrote: >Hi Carl, >Firstly, thanks for your work on this! >At a quick glance, the only two situations that need dots-limit =2 are >#11 and #23. Yes, those were my two cases as well. >A side issue: >An idea I've just had: would it be

Re: Tie settings question

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:47 PM, David Nalesnik wrote: > > I think you discarded the right method of determining direction. > Or, rather, you may have to use staff-position. ___ lilypond-user mailing list

Re: Tie settings question

Hi Karol, On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:15 PM, Karol Majewski wrote: > Here's full code. It's important to applay my tie settings. OK, thank you. That helps enormously. Above, I mentioned moving the check for dot direction, and refactoring the two if-statements for more compact

Re: Tie settings question

Here's full code. It's important to applay my tie settings. In the following example the third tie should be lowered by 0.25. tweakTie = #(lambda (grob) (let* ((ties (ly:grob-array->list (ly:grob-object grob 'ties))) (notehead (ly:spanner-bound

Re: Tie settings question

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:53 PM, Karol Majewski wrote: > I think I don't have to compare dot.staff-position and > notehead.staff-position. I can simply check if Dots.direction is 1 or -1. > > Still I'm doing something wrong here: Could you please provide your test example when

Re: Tie settings question

I think I don't have to compare dot.staff-position and notehead.staff-position. I can simply check if Dots.direction is 1 or -1. Still I'm doing something wrong here: tweakTie = #(lambda (grob) (let* ((ties (ly:grob-array->list (ly:grob-object grob 'ties)))

Re: Augmentation dot positioning

Thanks, Carl! > At a quick glance, the only two situations that need dots-limit =2 > are #11 and #23. Seconded. I also think that #13 also looks better with value 2 – the nearer the number of dots to the number of noteheads, the better. What about #24/2? Why is the lowest dot below the a's

Re: Tie settings question

OK, I've added this. Stem-dir is no longer needed. It doesn't work. I think something is wrong with notehead definition: tweakTie = #(lambda (grob) (let* ((ties (ly:grob-array->list (ly:grob-object grob 'ties))) (notehead (ly:spanner-bound (car

Re: Tie settings question

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Karol Majewski wrote: > Now I realised that, according to my concept, tie should be lowered not only > when > > (stem-direction == UP && tie-direction == UP && note-has-a-dot == true) > > but also when notehead is placed on staff-line and not on

polytempi in Lilypond - is it possible?

Hey Everybody, I would like to engrave a polytempical musical material in LilyPond. I am a newbie to this software so I am still learning the basics, but I saw quite a few mentions in some forum comments here and there, that LilyPond support polymetry and polytempi quite well and folks do it all

Re: Tie settings question

Now I realised that, according to my concept, tie should be lowered not only when (stem-direction == UP && tie-direction == UP && note-has-a-dot == true) but also when notehead is placed on staff-line and not on staff-space. In other words - when a dot is placed not on the same staff-position

Odp: Re: Tie settings question

OK, David, I've combined everything. Hopefully everything is fine now. Here it is: tweakTie = #(lambda (grob) (let* ((ties (ly:grob-array->list (ly:grob-object grob 'ties))) (notehead (ly:spanner-bound (car ties) LEFT)) (stem

Re: No readline in scheme-sandbox

On Sat 22 Oct 2016 at 11:27:41 (+0200), Thomas Morley wrote: > 2016-10-22 11:13 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup : > > Thomas Morley writes: > > > >> 2016-10-22 10:12 GMT+02:00 David Kastrup : > >>> Thomas Morley writes: >

Re: Tie settings question

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:37 AM, David Nalesnik wrote: > Hi Karol, > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Karol Majewski wrote: >> OK, I'm trying to write something like this in scheme: >> >> if (stem-direction == UP && tie-direction == UP &&

Re: Tie settings question

Hi Karol, On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Karol Majewski wrote: > OK, I'm trying to write something like this in scheme: > > if (stem-direction == UP && tie-direction == UP && note-has-a-dot == true) > { > \once \override Tie.details.skyline-padding = #5 > \once \override

Re: Augmentation dot positioning

On 25 Oct 2016 3:36 p.m., "Carl Sorensen" wrote: > > > > > At any rate, I have some results from Chris's test file. I have adjusted > the text to contain my assessment of the results. Please let me know if > you disagree with any of my assessments. > > chord-dots-limit = 1

Re: Augmentation dot positioning

On 9/19/16 7:50 AM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote: > >I agree with all of these points, and am working on an improved algorithm. > >Once I get the algorithm solidified, I know how to implement it. > >But I haven't got the algorithm solidified yet. > >Thanks, > >Carl OK, I have now

Re: Tie settings question

OK, I'm trying to write something like this in scheme: if (stem-direction == UP && tie-direction == UP && note-has-a-dot == true) { \once \override Tie.details.skyline-padding = #5 \once \override Tie.Y-offset = #-0.25 } Please, David or Harm, correct my mistakes. So far I've got this:

Re: Configurable Rests

Werner Arnhold writes: > Hi Kieren, > > as you said, works only with 2.19. I will use the solution for a large > project, so I have to work with a stable distribution. > > I will try to improve my knowledge in Scheme (never a fault) and look > for a solution on that

Re: Configurable Rests

Hi Werner, > as you said, works only with 2.19. I will use the solution for a large > project, so I have to work with a stable distribution. Just to reiterate: I use 2.19 for all my work, large and small (e.g., my current project is a 9-minute wind symphony for 36 players), and very rarely run

Re: Configurable Rests

Hi Kieren, as you said, works only with 2.19. I will use the solution for a large project, so I have to work with a stable distribution. I will try to improve my knowledge in Scheme (never a fault) and look for a solution on that way. Thank you all for your help! Werner Am Freitag, den