On 5/29/20, Pierre Perol-Schneider <pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Simone,
> A basic solution:
> \relative c' {
> \stemUp
> \override Fingering.staff-padding = #'()
> <c-1 e-2 g-3 b-5>4 <g'-\tweak extra-offset #'(-.1 . -4.3) -0>8 <g'>
> }
Sure there are workarounds, but: shouldn’t we be treating this as a
bug? There’s no obvious reason why unsetting staff-padding should be
ignored on a beamed note and not on an unbeamed note.
%%%%
\relative c' {
\stemUp
\override Fingering.staff-padding = #'()
<c-1 e-2 g-3 b-5>4 <g'-0>8
}
\relative c' {
\stemUp
\override Fingering.staff-padding = #'()
<c-1 e-2 g-3 b-5>4 <g'-0>8 <g'>
}
%%%%
I can’t find a glyph small enough to trigger it with other grobs
(a.k.a StringNumber, Script or anything else), so I can’t tell if it’s
limited to fingerings.
Cheers,
-- V.
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
