We have the following patch in staging (and likely soon in master)
commit d11e23cca2df1267b25c86d96a4dcffa957a7a55
Author: James Lowe <[email protected]>
Date: Sat Dec 3 09:42:02 2011 +0000
Doc: NR 1.6.2 - Staff Symbol
Simplified the \override constructions in @lilypond examples.
A first step for the forthcoming patch for 1935
Agreed with by Trevor and Graham.
diff --git a/Documentation/notation/staff.itely b/Documentation/notation/staff.i
index 052254e..bbf1327 100644
--- a/Documentation/notation/staff.itely
+++ b/Documentation/notation/staff.itely
@@ -431,9 +431,7 @@ staff. For an explanation, refer to the snippet section in
@ref{Clef}.
@lilypond[verbatim,quote,relative=2]
-\new Staff \with {
- \override StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3
-}
+\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3
{ d4 d d d }
@end lilypond
What is the idea behind that? This changes the examples from something
that works standalone to something that bombs out with
lilypond /tmp/xxx.ly
GNU LilyPond 2.15.21
Processing `/tmp/xxx.ly'
Parsing...
/tmp/xxx.ly:1:0: error: syntax error, unexpected \override
\override Staff.StaffSymbol #'line-count = #3
It only works inside of more complex music expressions, and it is rather
bad style to change the Staffsymbol inside of music expressions anyway.
For example, it won't work timely if a parallel voice starts with a
\grace, not even if you explicitly instantiate all voices.
Why are changes like that "agreed with" in the light of a "forthcoming
patch"?
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
