bug-lilypond
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: point and click references 0:0:0 with make-dynamic-script in definit


From: Colin Hall
Subject: Re: point and click references 0:0:0 with make-dynamic-script in definition
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 01:17:05 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Tue, Dec 25, 2012 at 09:05:25AM +0000, Richard Shann wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-12-25 at 08:36 +0000, Colin Hall wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:14:16PM +0000, Richard Shann wrote:
> > > This snippet (from the 2.16 manual
> > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.16/Documentation/notation/expressive-marks-attached-to-notes#index-DynamicText
> > >  )
> > > 
> > > moltoF = #(make-dynamic-script
> > >             (markup #:normal-text "molto"
> > >                     #:dynamic "f"))
> > > \relative c' {
> > >   <d e>16 <d e>
> > >   <d e>2..\moltoF
> > > }
> > > 
> > > gives a bad textedit:/// link in the pdf output to 0:0:0
> > > 
> > > I came across this via my own example and discovered that putting the
> > > definition in line shows no bug, so I sent it to the user list thinking
> > > my syntax was buggy, then I found the above snippet, so I guess this is
> > > a bug.
> > 
> > David Kastrup and I have tried to reproduce your bug report and we
> > don't see a problem.
>
> I have just re-tried and cannot reproduce it either, (sorry)

That's fine, Richard. Glad to hear that it is working for you.

> you cannot simply replace all \moltoF by the appropriate amount of
> the text following the = sign in the definition.

Yes. As David wrote on lilypond-user, one has to follow the examples here:

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/expressive-marks-attached-to-notes#new-dynamic-marks

> He also pointed out that replacing the # by $ did allow this construct
> to be inserted directly
> 
> But I have been completely unable to track down a reference
> to this $ notation in the docs :(

I had a look and I can't find it either. In fact I had trouble
tracking down documentation of the "#(" syntax but found this:

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/substitution-function-syntax

I thought I might find "$" or "dollar" in here:

http://www.lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/notation/lilypond-grammar

but no, I could not.

It looks like "$(" is a new, undocumented feature which permits an
alternative syntax for "substitution functions" and also allows for
them to be used in-line.

> Thank you for looking at this and once again apologies for the mistaken
> report.

You're very welcome. Thanks for identifying that gap in the docs.

Cheers,
Colin.

-- 

Colin Hall



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]