On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 11:38:22PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Carl Sorensen wrote Sunday, August 09, 2009 10:59 PM > > >Could the two of you please take some of these examples and beam > >them > >manually so that I can see what they *should* do? I'll then try > >to figure > >out why the autobeam engraver doesn't do it. > > > >Some explanation as to *why* it should work the way it should > >would also be > >helpful.
I just did a fresh install from current git, and apparently my patch is not needed after all. Something must have went wrong with my previous install. Trevor, I am seeing different beaming patterns than you are. I'll note these cases below. > \relative c'' { > a8 a a a a a a a | % OK > > a16 a a8 a a > a a16 a a8 a | % wrong, should be ... > a16[ a a8] a a > a[ a16 a] a8 a | The two measures above have the same beaming. > a8 a a16 a a8 > a a a a16 a | % wrong, should be ... > a8 a a16[ a a8] > a a a[ a16 a] | > > a8 a16 a a8 a16 a > a8 a16 a a8 a16 a | % wrong, should be ... > a8[ a16 a] a8 a16 a > a8[ a16 a] a8 a16 a | Same with these two measures (above). > a32 a a16 a a a a32 a a16 a > a a a32 a a16 a a a a32 a | % wrong, should be ... > a32[ a a16 a a] a[ a32 a a16 a] > a[ a a32 a a16] a a a a32 a > } I wonder why we are seeing different beaming patterns? I think all of your manually-beamed patterns are correct though. Thanks, Patrick _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel