Re: scheme modalTranspose

2018-03-09 Thread Gianmaria Lari 
On 10 March 2018 at 02:59, Andrew Bernard  wrote:

> Hi Gianamari,
>
> Add a numerical parameter.
>
>
> \version "2.19.81"
> multiModal = #(define-music-function (scale patternMelodic num)
> (ly:music? ly:music? number?)
>#{
>  #@(map(lambda (p)
>#{ \modalTranspose c #(ly:make-pitch -1 p) $scale
> $patternMelodic #})
>  (iota num))
>#})
>
> scale = {c d e f g a b}
>
> \score {
>   \multiModal \scale {c' d' c' r} 5
>   \layout {}
> }
>
> Andrew
>


Ahhh I did the same but with $num .

Thank you Andrew!
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: that migrating "opus"

2018-03-09 Thread David Wright 
On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 21:35:34 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> David,
> 
> Very interesting, been there, done that!

Except that the example you just posted doesn't seem to indicate
that you took anything away from the one already posted in
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2017-04/msg00784.html
which you could use as a pattern for your own scores.

> Now I am focusing on Haydn Sonatas - very inventive!
> 
> Mark
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: David Wright [mailto:lily...@lionunicorn.co.uk] 
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2018 9:20 PM
> To: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
> Cc: 'Lilypond-User Mailing List' 
> Subject: Re: that migrating "opus"
> 
> On Thu 08 Mar 2018 at 16:17:16 (-0800), Mark Stephen Mrotek wrote:
> > I am setting a Haydn piano sonata
> > \version "2.19.80"
> > \header {
> >   title = "Sonata"
> >   composer = "F. J. Haydn"
> >   opus = "XVI:6"
> > }
> > \include "XVI-6-1.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > \include "XVI-6-2a.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > \include "XVI-6-2b.ly"
> > \pageBreak
> > 
> > As expected the "opus" migrates to each and every score. The 
> > documentation
> > states:  "only piece and opus fields are printed by default in Score 
> > Titles."
> > 
> > Since I have not, in my limited experience, seen an opus number on 
> > each movement that I have read, I am asking for the rational/purpose 
> > for having the opus migrate.
> 
> If I've got hold of the right end of the stick, imagine you're setting the 
> Brahms opus 118 Klavierstüke, then you would label the six scores thus:
> 
> 1: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 1
> 2: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 2
> 3: piece=Ballade,opus=opus 118 no 3
> 4: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 4
> 5: piece=Romanze,opus=opus 118 no 5
> 6: piece=Intermezzo, opus=opus 118 no 6
> 
> Cheers,
> David.
> 
> 
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: scheme modalTranspose

2018-03-09 Thread Andrew Bernard 
Hi Gianamari,

Add a numerical parameter.


\version "2.19.81"
multiModal = #(define-music-function (scale patternMelodic num)
(ly:music? ly:music? number?)
   #{
 #@(map(lambda (p)
   #{ \modalTranspose c #(ly:make-pitch -1 p) $scale
$patternMelodic #})
 (iota num))
   #})

scale = {c d e f g a b}

\score {
  \multiModal \scale {c' d' c' r} 5
  \layout {}
}

Andrew



On 10 March 2018 at 09:26, Gianmaria Lari  wrote:

> This function transpose modally some music in the seven degrees of the
> scale:
>
> \version "2.19.81"
> multiModal = #(define-music-function (scale patternMelodic) (ly:music?
> ly:music?)
>#{
>  #@(map(lambda (p)
>#{ \modalTranspose c #(ly:make-pitch -1 p) $scale
> $patternMelodic #})
>  (iota 7))
>#})
>
> scale = {c d e f g a b}
>
> \score {
>   \multiModal \scale {c' d' c' r}
>   \layout {}
> }
>
>
> If I want to make the transposition only for the first three degrees of
> the scale I have to change
>
> (iota 7)
>
> to
>
> (iota 3)
>
> What if I want to pass to the function the number of transposition ? So
> that if I want the first four transpositions I could write something like
>
>
>   \multiModal \scale {c' d' c' r} 4
>
> ?
>
> Thank you, g.
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

scheme modalTranspose

2018-03-09 Thread Gianmaria Lari 
This function transpose modally some music in the seven degrees of the
scale:

\version "2.19.81"
multiModal = #(define-music-function (scale patternMelodic) (ly:music?
ly:music?)
   #{
 #@(map(lambda (p)
   #{ \modalTranspose c #(ly:make-pitch -1 p) $scale
$patternMelodic #})
 (iota 7))
   #})

scale = {c d e f g a b}

\score {
  \multiModal \scale {c' d' c' r}
  \layout {}
}


If I want to make the transposition only for the first three degrees of the
scale I have to change

(iota 7)

to

(iota 3)

What if I want to pass to the function the number of transposition ? So
that if I want the first four transpositions I could write something like


  \multiModal \scale {c' d' c' r} 4

?

Thank you, g.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Frescobaldi’s use of the version statement

2018-03-09 Thread Simon Albrecht 

On 09.03.2018 17:13, David Wright wrote:

You can even use Frescobaldi's option "Automatically choose LilyPond version
from document".

Ouch. I hadn't come across that one. Sounds really bad to me.
a) you're not really in control of what's running,


Huh? You can choose which of the LilyPond versions (that you have 
installed) you make available to Frescobaldi. Then you start on a 
project, and by typing the \version statement you also tell Frescobaldi 
which LilyPond version to compile it with (assuming that version is 
installed – fallback options are handled gracefully). In the ‘terrible’ 
case that the version specified by the version statement or the one 
chosen by Frescobaldi isn’t the one you wanted to compile it with, you’d 
be able to see in the log panel.

I don’t see any problem with that.


b) what happening when all the includes have different version numbers,


Frescobaldi will always go after the first one.


c) it sends a misleading message to a naive user that \version
statements are meant to*do*  something, when that is not their function.

Just for interest, here are the version statements from the files
installed by lilypond-2.19.80-1.linux-64.sh

\version "2.14.0"
\version "2.16.0"
\version "2.17.25"
\version "2.17.6"
\version "2.18.2"
\version "2.19.16"
\version "2.19.22"
\version "2.19.25"
\version "2.19.29"
\version "2.19.46"
\version "2.19.80"


Development policy states that the \version statements will only be 
updated when the file is actually changed. So all this means is that 
some .ly file in the source code has been around without change since 
2.14.0, some were updated quite recently, etc.


Best, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Having trouble understanding optional and variable amount of arguments

2018-03-09 Thread Urs Liska 

Hi Stéfano,


Am 09.03.2018 um 16:48 schrieb Stefano Troncaro:

A few thoughts

I think macro definitions for all the define- functions can be avoided 
like this:


\version  "2.19.80" \include  "oll-core/package.ily" #(define-macro  
(with-options func-def-proc vars preds rulings . body)
`(,func-def-proc ,(append  '(opts) vars) ,(append  '(ly:context-mod?) 
preds)
   (let*  ((rules ,rulings)
  (props (context-mod->props rules #t opts)))
 . ,body)))

testRules =
#(with-optionsdefine-void-function  () ()
`((ind ,number?  5)
  (target ,symbol?)
  (payload)
  (accepted-arg ,fraction?  opt)
  (accepted-without-type opt)
  (msg ,string?  "No message given"))
(pretty-print  props))

\testRules  \with  { msg ="Something" unk ="Unknown option" target = 
something
% accepted-arg = 7/4 % accepted-without-type = #(ly:make-moment
3/16) }




Yes, I like this very much. You still have the familiar 
define-X-function with the args and predicates in the usual place, but 
with 'with-options' you signal that there will be a rule set for options.


With respect on how to write the rule-set, based on your input I see a 
few possibilities:


1) A very slight modification of its current form

`((rule-enforcement strict)
  (ind ,number?  5)
  (target ,symbol?)
  (payload)
  (accepted-arg ,fraction?  opt)
  (accepted-without-type opt)
  (msg ,string?  "No message given"))

This keeps the "list of lists" approach you wanted.


I'm not 100% sure if I have a strong opinion between this and your 
hierarchical suggestion. But I *think* I like this one more.
I agree with you that options with a default value become optional and 
should not have to be flagged as such separately.


I think that the parsing of the options could be set to 'flexible' by 
default and it can be made strict adding that as the first element of 
the list. Alternatively, a rule-enforcement element may be required.


I suggest to require the statement about rule-enforcement because 
otherwise one would probably always confuse things.
But *if* we require it - and as the first element - it doesn't have to 
be a list (which would BTW rule out an option with that name) but can be 
a symbol:


   `(strict
 (ind ,number?  5)
 ...




2) Optional arguments could be anticipated with an opt instead of 
having it at the end:


`((ind ,number?  5)
  (target ,symbol?)
  (payload)
  (opt accepted-arg ,fraction?)
  (opt accepted-without-type)
  (msg ,string?  "No message given"))

This requires the same input as before but feels clearer to my eyes.


I partially disagree. Not with the idea of having the flag in front of 
the list but with using a/that symbol. Apart from ruling out 'opt as an 
option name (OK, in my implementation 'opt couldn't be used as a 
*default*) I think this is confusing because you have a first "column" 
of payload - opt - msg.


What do you think about

   `(strict
 (ind ,number?  5)
 (target ,symbol?)
 (payload)
 (? accepted-arg ,fraction?)
 (? accepted-without-type)
 (msg ,string?  "No message given"))

?
Technically it's still a symbol but indicates much better the idea of 
"optional".


I see what you mean about the POV defining what can be called 
optional. As I described earlier, the "caller" POV feels more 
intuitive for me but that may just be personal taste. Without more 
opinions it's difficult to tell.


3) The "elimination of unnecessary parens" is indeed a very minor 
thing. That approach felt instantly familiar because it resembles how 
function predicates are defined, in that only the proc is written when 
there is no default value, but the proc and the default value are 
parenthesized when they are needed together. In the same logic, I 
thought the key could be by itself when all one needed was to 
communicate "this is optional" or "this is required", and 
parenthesized with more information when needed.


My previous idea was merely just these three together. As you pointed 
out, I think the first is the one of real importance, and the others 
are more in the realm of QOL suggestions.


For now I'll await your thoughts, and I'll open a pull request later.


I'd be glad about a PR along these lines!

Best
Urs



2018-03-09 4:29 GMT-03:00 Urs Liska >:





@Urs
I've thought about this some more. I don't know if you were
interested in wrapping the functions that use opts and props in a
macro, but I noticed a lot of redundancy so I gave it a try.

\version  "2.19.80" \include  "oll-core/package.ily" #(define-macro  
(define-void-function-with-options vars preds rulings . body)
`(define-void-function  ,(append  '(opts) vars) ,(append  
'(ly:context-mod?) preds)
   (define  rules

Re: The frescobaldi Issue and Cannot load the 2.19 lily development version

2018-03-09 Thread David Wright 
On Fri 09 Mar 2018 at 08:25:58 (-0700), Torsten Hämmerle wrote:
> peter.gentry-2 wrote
> > I have been using a saved download of 2.19.65-1.mingw.exe  25,348 KB.
> 
>  
> Hi Peter,
> 
> Out of curiosity, I have just downloaded 2.19.65 via 
> http://lilypond.org/downloads/binaries/mingw/
> 
> Windows Explorer says "33,556 KB" for lilypond-2.19.65-1.mingw.exe
> Perhaps you should try a new download (working link see above).
> 
> 
> peter.gentry-2 wrote
> > Installing today resulted in failure, no response from the command promt. 
> 
> Installed it by specifying destination folder
> C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\2.19.65\
> 
> Installation completed, version (i.e. path) added to Frescobaldi's "LilyPond
> versions to use" list, everything in best working order, LilyPond log says
> "Starting lilypond.exe 2.19.65 ..." when compiling.
> Windows 10 Pro 64 bit. 

Is it simple, with Windows, to calculate (and post) a message digest for
that downloaded file, either MD5 or one of the SHA versions?

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Success

2018-03-09 Thread peter.gentry 
Today both machines are working so fingers crossed I have seen the last of
-1073741819.

 

Downloads from
http://lilypond.org/downloads/binaries/mingw/lilypond-2.19.81-1.mingw.exe>
worked.

 

My suspicion still remains something to do with file permissions/ownership
but cannot pin it down.

 

 

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Help I despair

2018-03-09 Thread David Wright 
On Fri 09 Mar 2018 at 06:43:58 (-0700), Torsten Hämmerle wrote:

> As each LilyPond version has its own set of executables, includes, even
> fonts, I always insert Lily's version number into the path during the
> LilyPond installation process. That way, different LilyPond versions can
> peacefully co-exist and be used in parallel without any interference.
> 
> Example for 2.19.81
> C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\2.19.81\usr\bin\lilypond.exe
> 
> Example for 2.18.2
> C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\2.18.2\usr\bin\lilypond.exe
> 
> These versions/paths have to be specified in Frescobaldi via 
> Edit -> Preferences ... -> LilyPond Preferences 
> in the "LilyPond versions to use" block.

I couldn't agree more, and the same goes for Frescobaldi.
It also might help to keep an eye on what version of Ghostscript
is being used as there have been similar error codes reported.

We can assume that the OP is not compiling any "pathological" code
to cause these errors, so it's very likely there's a mis-match
somewhere. Carefully reinstalling the various components (and
keeping a record) is usually more fruitful than trying to work
backwards from that particular Windows error.

> You can even use Frescobaldi's option "Automatically choose LilyPond version
> from document".

Ouch. I hadn't come across that one. Sounds really bad to me.
a) you're not really in control of what's running,
b) what happening when all the includes have different version numbers,
c) it sends a misleading message to a naive user that \version
   statements are meant to *do* something, when that is not their function.

Just for interest, here are the version statements from the files
installed by lilypond-2.19.80-1.linux-64.sh

\version "2.14.0"
\version "2.16.0"
\version "2.17.25"
\version "2.17.6"
\version "2.18.2"
\version "2.19.16"
\version "2.19.22"
\version "2.19.25"
\version "2.19.29"
\version "2.19.46"
\version "2.19.80"

Cheers,
David.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Having trouble understanding optional and variable amount of arguments

2018-03-09 Thread Stefano Troncaro 
A few thoughts

I think macro definitions for all the define- functions can be avoided like
this:

> \version "2.19.80"\include "oll-core/package.ily"
> #(define-macro (with-options func-def-proc vars preds rulings . body)
>`(,func-def-proc ,(append '(opts) vars) ,(append '(ly:context-mod?) preds)
>   (let* ((rules ,rulings)
>  (props (context-mod->props rules #t opts)))
> . ,body)))
>
> testRules =
> #(with-options define-void-function () ()
>`((ind ,number? 5)
>  (target ,symbol?)
>  (payload)
>  (accepted-arg ,fraction? opt)
>  (accepted-without-type opt)
>  (msg ,string? "No message given"))
>(pretty-print props))
> \testRules \with {
>   msg = "Something"
>   unk = "Unknown option"
>   target = something%  accepted-arg = 7/4
> %  accepted-without-type = #(ly:make-moment 3/16)}
>
>
With respect on how to write the rule-set, based on your input I see a few
possibilities:

1) A very slight modification of its current form

>`((rule-enforcement strict)
>  (ind ,number? 5)
>  (target ,symbol?)
>  (payload)
>  (accepted-arg ,fraction? opt)
>  (accepted-without-type opt)
>  (msg ,string? "No message given"))
>
> This keeps the "list of lists" approach you wanted. I think that the
parsing of the options could be set to 'flexible' by default and it can be
made strict adding that as the first element of the list. Alternatively, a
rule-enforcement element may be required.

2) Optional arguments could be anticipated with an opt instead of having it
at the end:

>`((ind ,number? 5)
>  (target ,symbol?)
>  (payload)
>  (opt accepted-arg ,fraction?)
>  (opt accepted-without-type)
>  (msg ,string? "No message given"))
>
> This requires the same input as before but feels clearer to my eyes. I see
what you mean about the POV defining what can be called optional. As I
described earlier, the "caller" POV feels more intuitive for me but that
may just be personal taste. Without more opinions it's difficult to tell.

3) The "elimination of unnecessary parens" is indeed a very minor thing.
That approach felt instantly familiar because it resembles how function
predicates are defined, in that only the proc is written when there is no
default value, but the proc and the default value are parenthesized when
they are needed together. In the same logic, I thought the key could be by
itself when all one needed was to communicate "this is optional" or "this
is required", and parenthesized with more information when needed.

My previous idea was merely just these three together. As you pointed out,
I think the first is the one of real importance, and the others are more in
the realm of QOL suggestions.

For now I'll await your thoughts, and I'll open a pull request later.

2018-03-09 4:29 GMT-03:00 Urs Liska :

>
>
> @Urs
> I've thought about this some more. I don't know if you were interested in
> wrapping the functions that use opts and props in a macro, but I noticed a
> lot of redundancy so I gave it a try.
>
>> \version "2.19.80"\include "oll-core/package.ily"
>> #(define-macro (define-void-function-with-options vars preds rulings . body)
>>`(define-void-function ,(append '(opts) vars) ,(append '(ly:context-mod?) 
>> preds)
>>   (define rules
>> ,rulings)
>>   (let ((props (context-mod->props rules #t opts)))
>> . ,body)))
>>
>> testRules =
>> #(define-void-function-with-options () ()
>>`((ind ,number? 5)
>>  (target ,symbol?)
>>  (payload)
>>  (accepted-arg ,fraction? opt)
>>  (accepted-without-type opt)
>>  (msg ,string? "No message given"))
>>(pretty-print props))
>> \testRules \with {
>>   msg = "Something"
>>   unk = "Unknown option"
>>   target = something%  accepted-arg = 7/4
>> %  accepted-without-type = #(ly:make-moment 3/16)}
>>
>> Again, tell me if you find it convenient.
>
>
> Hm.
> The definition of testRules looks pretty good. What I'm not so sure about
> is that this would actually imply creating -with-options variants of *all*
> define- macros, and I'm not sure if that would add unnecessary complexity
> compared to "simply" calling context-mod->props within a function
> definition.
>
> Actually, I start thinking if this doesn't call for a "proper" solution to
> be added to LilyPond itself. Of course I'm hijacking ly:context-mod? which
> is semantically there for a different purpose.
> What I would like to see is a different predicate, say, ly:properties?
> that internally is a simple key-value alist but that can be entered with
> the same \with {} syntax.
>
> Urs
>
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
>
>
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: slur on ornament

2018-03-09 Thread Torsten Hämmerle 
By the way,

In addition to all the viable solutions provided, I'd like to point out that
an \appoggiatura slur is just an ordinary slur in the end and if you don't
like the default direction you may just override Slur.direction or use the
\slurUp shortcut.

{ \clef bass \slurUp \appoggiatura d'8 4 }

All the best,
Torsten





--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RE: slur on ornament

2018-03-09 Thread Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Kieren,

Yes it does. I forgot about using the ^( inside of a chord.

Many thanks.

Mark

-Original Message-
From: Kieren MacMillan [mailto:kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca] 
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2018 7:26 AM
To: Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Cc: Lilypond-User Mailing List 
Subject: Re: slur on ornament

Hi Mark,

> This is what I want
> 
> \grace does not provide a slur.
> \appoggiatura slurs to the f.
>  
> Any suggestions welcome.

{ \clef bass \grace { d'8^( } 4) }

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: slur on ornament

2018-03-09 Thread Robert Schmaus 
I think this could work with simultaneous implicit voices like this:

<< 
  { \appoggiatura{e16} f4 }
  { \grace{s16} c4 }
>>

Sorry, I'm not at my computer right now, but I'm sure this construction should 
do. 

Best, Robert

> On 9 Mar 2018, at 16:19, Mark Stephen Mrotek  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
>  
> This is what I want
> 
> \grace does not provide a slur.
> \appoggiatura slurs to the f.
>  
> Any suggestions welcome.
>  
> Thank you!
>  
> Mark
> ___
> lilypond-user mailing list
> lilypond-user@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: slur on ornament

2018-03-09 Thread Kieren MacMillan 
Hi Mark,

> This is what I want
> 
> \grace does not provide a slur.
> \appoggiatura slurs to the f.
>  
> Any suggestions welcome.

{ \clef bass \grace { d'8^( } 4) }

Hope that helps!
Kieren.


Kieren MacMillan, composer
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: The frescobaldi Issue and Cannot load the 2.19 lily development version

2018-03-09 Thread Torsten Hämmerle 
peter.gentry-2 wrote
> I have been using a saved download of 2.19.65-1.mingw.exe  25,348 KB.

 
Hi Peter,

Out of curiosity, I have just downloaded 2.19.65 via 
http://lilypond.org/downloads/binaries/mingw/

Windows Explorer says "33,556 KB" for lilypond-2.19.65-1.mingw.exe
Perhaps you should try a new download (working link see above).


peter.gentry-2 wrote
> Installing today resulted in failure, no response from the command promt. 

Installed it by specifying destination folder
C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\2.19.65\

Installation completed, version (i.e. path) added to Frescobaldi's "LilyPond
versions to use" list, everything in best working order, LilyPond log says
"Starting lilypond.exe 2.19.65 ..." when compiling.
Windows 10 Pro 64 bit. 

All the best,
Torsten

 






--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Help I despair

2018-03-09 Thread Dr . Raphael D . Thöne 
Setup a virtual Linux machine and compile it under Frescobaldi Linux or 
directly from the command prompt.
Raphael.


Am 09.03.2018 um 11:13 schrieb 
peter.gen...@sunscales.myzen.co.uk:

Today Fresco on Laptop working Fresco on Desktop produces the -1073741819 
exception error. This is the opposite of yesterday.

Again there are NO log messages except this error.

Moving a compiled file from laptop to desktop and Fresco will display the 
revised file and play the midi. It will NOT complie the file.

This is clearly a Windows issue but it is driving me potty I am spending more 
time trying to sort it out than working on my scores..

Suggestions would be very gratefully received.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Absolute temporal positioning of mm-rests

2018-03-09 Thread Arttu Punkkinen 
Hi!

I was wondering, if there is a way to specify a multimeasure rest which
length is only relatively defined so that it ends at predetermined bar
number?

I often find myself needing to adjust or add material between multimeasure
rests, which currently need manual adjustment to keep alignment.

An example.
R1*4
c4 d e f
R1*4
g4 g g g

Now if we adjust the length of the middle section there, we need to adjust
multimeasure rests accordingly.

R1*4
c4 d e f
g4 e d c
R1*3
g4 g g g

So, if we had some "absolute bar alignment", it might make orchestral music
a bit easier.

Like...

\restUntil #5
c4 d e f
\restUntil #9
g4 g g g

Or do we perhaps already have a way for that?

Regards
Arttu Punkkinen
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

slur on ornament

2018-03-09 Thread Mark Stephen Mrotek 
Hello,

 

This is what I want



\grace does not provide a slur.

\appoggiatura slurs to the f.

 

Any suggestions welcome.

 

Thank you!

 

Mark

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: The frescobaldi Issue and Cannot load the 2.19 lily development version

2018-03-09 Thread Abraham Lee 
Hi, Peter!

One thought, that you’ve possibly considered, but I’ll mention it anyway...

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 8:00 AM  wrote:

> I have been using a saved download of 2.19.65-1.mingw.exe  25,348 KB.
>
>
>
> Installing today resulted in failure, no response from the command promt.
>
>
>
> So I went back to 2.18.2 this did work from command prompt and Frescobaldi.
>
>
>
> It seems there may be something in the 2.19.65-1 file that I have saved.
> Windows doesn’t like but without any error code it is impossible to track
> it down.
>
>
>
> I cannot load any 2.19 version from the lilypond.org
>

In the more recent versions of 2.19.XX, something has caused a much more
substantial wait time which is required for LilyPond to create its font
cache for that particular LP version, and is required for any version when
it is run for the first time or when there is a change to what fonts are
installed in the system font folder.

What I’m getting at is that you may be not seeing anything in the command
prompt because nothing is printed while this font cache is being created.
If you aren’t seeing an error when you try to run LP, give it some time,
perhaps even 10 minutes just to be sure. It just might be this that’s
causing you grief. Once the font cache is created, you’ll see the much
quicker score compile times you’re used to.

If you’ve gone through this exercise already and/or you’re experiencing
something else then please ignore this. It’s good to know that what I’ve
described is expected behavior anyway.

HTH,
Abraham
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

The frescobaldi Issue and Cannot load the 2.19 lily development version

2018-03-09 Thread peter.gentry 
I have been using a saved download of 2.19.65-1.mingw.exe  25,348 KB.

 

Installing today resulted in failure, no response from the command promt. 

 

So I went back to 2.18.2 this did work from command prompt and Frescobaldi.

 

It seems there may be something in the 2.19.65-1 file that I have saved.
Windows doesn't like but without any error code it is impossible to track it
down.  

 

I cannot load any 2.19 version from the lilypond.org web site.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: More Lily Issues

2018-03-09 Thread Karlin High 

On 3/9/2018 7:52 AM, peter.gen...@sunscales.myzen.co.uk wrote:
The requested URL /lilypond/binaries/mingw/lilypond-2.19.81-1.mingw.exe 
was not found on this server.




/Apache/2.4.25 (Debian) Server at download.linuxaudio.org Port 80/



Downloads from LinuxAudio are currently unavailable. It's a recurring 
them in lilypond-user the past weeks. Try these links:





--
Karlin High
Missouri, USA

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

More Lily Issues

2018-03-09 Thread peter.gentry 
The requested URL /lilypond/binaries/mingw/lilypond-2.19.81-1.mingw.exe was
not found on this server.

  _  

Apache/2.4.25 (Debian) Server at download.linuxaudio.org Port 80

 

Cannot load this from Lilypond.org

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Help I despair

2018-03-09 Thread Torsten Hämmerle 
Hi Peter,

Occasionally, I've had similar problems with Windows 10 in the past.
What saved me was the possibility to choose between several versions of
LilyPond.

Default Windows path (as I've seen it in your postings)

C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\usr\bin\lilypond.exe

As each LilyPond version has its own set of executables, includes, even
fonts, I always insert Lily's version number into the path during the
LilyPond installation process. That way, different LilyPond versions can
peacefully co-exist and be used in parallel without any interference.

Example for 2.19.81
C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\2.19.81\usr\bin\lilypond.exe

Example for 2.18.2
C:\Program Files (x86)\LilyPond\2.18.2\usr\bin\lilypond.exe

These versions/paths have to be specified in Frescobaldi via 
Edit -> Preferences ... -> LilyPond Preferences 
in the "LilyPond versions to use" block.
You can even use Frescobaldi's option "Automatically choose LilyPond version
from document".

This may not eliminate the cause, but it saved my a... several times when
specific LilyPond versions played havoc in Windows.

Good luck
Torsten




--
Sent from: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/User-f3.html

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Help I despair

2018-03-09 Thread Ben 


On 3/9/2018 5:13 AM, peter.gen...@sunscales.myzen.co.uk wrote:


Today Fresco on Laptop working Fresco on Desktop produces the 
-1073741819 exception error. This is the opposite of yesterday.


Again there are NO log messages except this error.

Moving a compiled file from laptop to desktop and Fresco will display 
the revised file and play the midi. It will NOT complie the file.


This is clearly a Windows issue but it is driving me potty I am 
spending more time trying to sort it out than working on my scores..


Suggestions would be very gratefully received.




Is there a chance you would consider re-installing Windows? Of course, 
it's a hassle and never exciting to perform but, it would indeed rule 
out all variables and a clean slate would provide you a fresh outlook on 
the situation. Maybe it's worth it?


I would suggest at this point, after all you've experienced, back up 
your important files on a flash drive etc. and just wipe Windows and 
begin fresh. I've hit that wall a few times over the years and each time 
I did it, although I hated re-installing programs (or using images), it 
did fix 100% of my issues moving forward.


Good luck Peter.


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Help I despair

2018-03-09 Thread peter.gentry 
Today Fresco on Laptop working Fresco on Desktop produces the -1073741819
exception error. This is the opposite of yesterday.

 

Again there are NO log messages except this error.

 

Moving a compiled file from laptop to desktop and Fresco will display the
revised file and play the midi. It will NOT complie the file.

 

This is clearly a Windows issue but it is driving me potty I am spending
more time trying to sort it out than working on my scores..

 

Suggestions would be very gratefully received.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user