Re: Aleatoric / modern notation

[SoundsFromSound]

Hi David,

I'm a little confused.  What problems was David talking about, I didn't
follow.  So we shouldn't use this boxed notation approach, or we should but
with caveats?

Thanks,
Ben



>
> That regression test tampered with internals of LilyPond in a manner
> that broke session integrity (any changes propagated to further files
> processed on the command line).  It likely still does.  The internals
> changed in the mean time.
>
> It was probably a mistake to ever include this regtest.  It just gives
> people bad ideas.
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>

It is possible to get this working with 2.16 on up.  You just need to
rewrite a few things after the changes done to the regression test on
which the file is based.

I'm attaching a revision of the file which won't raise the errors you
saw, but it is not a solution to the problems that David Kastrup
mentions.

Best,
David N.

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


frameEngraver4.ly (13K)
<http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/attachment/136166/0/frameEngraver4.ly>





-----
composer | sound designer
--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Aleatoric-modern-notation-tp18113p136170.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.