"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes:
> "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org> wrote in message
> news:87ei92oxo3....@lola.goethe.zz...
>> "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes:
>>
>>> \relative c' {
>>> \clef bass cis2 c
>>> \clef tenor cis2 \clef bass c % natural is not printed!!
>>> \clef bass cis2 \clef tenor c
>>> }
>>
>>
>> Could you _please_ _never_ write an answer or comment in the _signature_
>> of the original posting? Sensible mailreaders don't quote the signature
>> when replying, cutting away all of your content.
>
> Apologies. As you're probably aware, I'm a Windows man, and some
> postings don't quote properly using my mailreader.
I am sure that there are sensible configurations available also for
Windows mailreasers.
> As a result, If I want all the > signs there, I have to put them in by
> hand. In this case, I didn't bother.
You should at the very least delete the signature marker ("-- " on a
line of its own).
>> Now to your comment:
>>
>>> It's doing what I would expect from reading the regtest - i.e. - when
>>> there is a clef change, the accidentals are reset to that which you'd
>>> expect from the key. Therefore, in your example we return to C major,
>>> and so there's no need to print the accidental. I'd welcome other
>>> thoughts as to whether this is correct, though.
>>
>> I don't think it is correct. If you set the above with \key g\major,
>> you will notice that the key signature is _not_ repeated with a clef
>> change. So there is no visual or logical reason to assume
>> "accidentals are reset". If that was the underlying assumption for a
>> clef change, the key signature would be repeated.
>
> So I'm confused as to what the regtest text cited means. It
> (accidental-clef-change.ly) says "Accidentals are reset for clef
> changes."
Which is likely the intent. It is still not proper in my opinion. I
would suppose that a conservative approach would be to mark all
non-signature accidentals in force at the time of the clef change in a
manner that will cause a (sometimes cautionary) accidental to be printed
regardless of whether the next note on the previously
accidental-equipped is in-signature or not.
That's sort of a half-reset of accidentals: it sets all non-signature
accidentals basically to "unknown".
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
