Am 16.01.2013 11:48, schrieb Kevin
Patrick Barry:
Hi Urs,
Since you asked for opinions I will offer mine.
Thanks!
I do quite a bit of work with LaTeX and LilyPond,
but I don't use lilypond-book for a couple of
reasons.
It generates a lot of extra files and folders that
create clutter if you don't direct its output to a
separate folder, but when I do that, links to other
files (graphics for example) in the .tex file no
longer work since it's in a different folder now (I
keep all linked files in the same folder as the .tex
file because it's on Dropbox and the full path to it
is different on different computers).
so it isn't possible to either
- let lilypond-book remove the intermediate files (as lilypond
itself does nowadays by default)
or
- let lilypond-book place the resulting .tex file in the original
path and only the other files in the --out path
?
If that would be changed, would that make a big difference for you
(I ask because both options don't seem to be complicated to
implement).
Also there is (or was?) an annoying bug whereby
LilyPond doesn't take elements to the left of the
staff (instrument names and such) into account in
calculating the line-width of a system that
occasionally cause systems to spill over in the
right-hand margin. In those situations I had to use
goofy workarounds to make them fit.
OK, does anybody know if that's still the case?
For those reasons I prefer to simply export images
(Frescobaldi makes this very simple) and link to them as
with other graphics. (Using a fixed line-width in
LilyPond avoids the need to scale them or anything like
that.)
The main advantage I lose is lilypond-book's ability to
split a single score over page breaks when it makes for a
better layout (this is possible manually, but tedious),
Yes, that's one of the points in using lilypond-book.
and if you were making a book purely of scores (but
including a written introduction, or opening remarks or
other material of that nature) I think lilypond-book is
the way to go.
Hm, For such a document I actually rather use standalone lilypond
and \includepdf.
But another point I find attractive in using lilypond-book (although
I don't have any experience with it yet) is the ability to adapt to
the document's layout.
And I find it quite useful (for snippets and other short examples)
to have the lilypond source directly maintained within the tex
document.
Ideally, invoking LilyPond in LaTeX would be rather like
using, for example, the Tikz package: the code is processed
when LaTeX is run (no need to use lilypond-book first), but
given LilyPond's size and complexity (compared to a package
like Tikz) I'm not sure if that is possible. I know very
little about programming; is it possible to get LaTeX to
invoke LilyPond on a computer where it is installed? Or
would it be necessary to create a package that included the
whole LilyPond program?
AFAICS this would be possible. But wouldn't this cause Lilypond to
recompile all files for each LaTeX run?
Sounds like a nightmare ...
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
|