On Nov 3, 2014, at 02:25 , Keith OHara <k-ohara5...@oco.net> wrote: > >> 1. if there is a glyph of the right name, use it >> 2. otherwise, fall back on numbered style >> >> would be a good idea? I was considering that. > > That kind logic is already at the end of > Time_signature::special_time_signature() now, but I don't see any way to use > it for anything except 2/2 and 4/4.
The logic used for neomensural, mensural, and any other style that is not explicitly named in time-signature.cc results in a warning if the glyph is not found. For the “C” style, that logic is preempted so that it will not warn, but it doesn’t try looking for other glyphs besides C22 and C44. (I believe we’re talking about the same thing.) I was thinking of changing the “C” case work more like the last-try case except without warning if there is no glyph. > I was arguing that as the use-cases get more specific, where you would want > to pick a particular glyph, figuring out what options to set is harder than > the direct approach: > > {\override Staff.TimeSignature.stencil = #ly:text-interface::print > \override Staff.TimeSignature.text = > \markup {\musicglyph #"timesig.C22" \musicglyph #"timesig.C22" } > \time 4/2 b1 b1 } Yes, I see your point. You and the experience of converting C++ to Scheme have convinced me that there is no good reason to add the double-C time signatures. However, remembering that time signatures can sometimes be created without an event (see below), I think it is valuable to let the user define a new style, so I will make sure that that works. \version "2.18" << \new Staff { \override Staff.TimeSignature.stencil = #ly:text-interface::print \override Staff.TimeSignature.text = \markup {\musicglyph #"timesig.C22" \musicglyph #"timesig.C22" } \time 4/2 b1 b1 } \new Staff { b1 b1 } >> Thanks, — Dan _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel