[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent
From: |
Marc Hohl |
Subject: |
Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent |
Date: |
Sun, 22 Jan 2012 10:41:28 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.24) Gecko/20111109 Thunderbird/3.1.16 |
Am 21.01.2012 20:17, schrieb Carl Sorensen:
On 1/21/12 11:47 AM, "Marc Hohl"<address@hidden> wrote:
I must admit that I am lost here and do not quite understand what's
going on,
but will there be any difference between
< c\3 e\2 g\1> and< c e g>\3\2\1
once these changes are implemented?
The latter would not display anything anywhere.
Great!
I'm not sure you actually will find it great (although I think it is more
consistent).
If we don't want to have string numbers show up in the music, but we need
them for the tabstaff, right now we can do
<c e g>\3\2\1
In the future,<c e g>\3\2\1 won't assign the string numbers to the
tabstaff. (And in fact, I can't find this usage documented in the NR).
Yes, I stumbled upon it while we were discussing some other problems
concerning tablature, and I used this method to prevent the sting numbers
showing up.
\override StringNumber #'stencil = ##f
yielded in errors (but I think this has changed recently), and simply
setting
\override StringNumber #'transparent = ##t
still influenced the spacing for obvious reasons.
Instead, as would be done regularly in lilypond, we would do
\once \override StringNumber #'stencil = ##f
<c\3 e\2 g\1>
This is consistent with how things are handled in lilypond, so I think we
ought to move in this direction.
As setting the stencil to false seems to work now, I agree with you that
this is the
more lilypondish way to go.
Thanks for your explanations!
Regards,
Marc
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, (continued)
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, David Kastrup, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Carl Sorensen, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, David Kastrup, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Carl Sorensen, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Marc Hohl, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, David Kastrup, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Marc Hohl, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Carl Sorensen, 2012/01/21
- Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent,
Marc Hohl <=
Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Jean-Charles Malahieude, 2012/01/21
Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Julien Rioux, 2012/01/21
Re: 2.16 release candidate 3 imminent, Janek WarchoĊ, 2012/01/21