On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:06 PM, Dan Eble <d...@faithful.be> wrote:
> > I'm not top posting. > % This example might be worth more than one ticket. > \version "2.18.0" > \language "english" > > upper = \relative { bs'4 } > lower = \relative { b'4 } > chord = \relative { <bs' b>4 } > > % In this case, the output clearly represents something other than the > % input. The input doesn't make much sense in the kinds of music I'm > % familiar with, so I don't think there is a major problem with what > % Lilypond has done except that it should warn that it did not engrave > % what was requested. > \score { > \new Staff << > \set Staff.instrumentName = "<< \\\\ >>" > \dynamicUp \upper > \\ > \dynamicDown \lower > >> > } > > % In this case, I'm not sure what the output represents, but unless > % Lilypond is already engraving the expected musical notation, it > % should warn. > \score { > \new Staff << > \set Staff.instrumentName = "< >" > \chord > >> > } > > % The part combiner can choose either to put the two notes in separate > % voices or in the same voice. Is the current behavior the better > % choice in this case? Possibly not. > \score { > \new Staff << > \set Staff.instrumentName = "partcombine" > \partcombine \upper \lower > >> > } > > % ... and the CAPTCHA is "oddities." How appropriate. :-) > > Greetings, Dan Eble. Thanks for the email. This has been submitted as Issue 4113. https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4113 Ralph _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond