Am 02.04.2017 um 22:24 schrieb David Kastrup:
Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> writes:
Am 02.04.2017 um 15:25 schrieb David Kastrup:
R4*7 is fundamentally different in meaning (provide 7/4 total amount of
full-measure rests) from r4*7 (a quarter rest visual with 7 times its
length). Full-measure rests are aligned to the middle of the bar, other
rests are aligned to the beginning of the bar and/or parallel music.
But does it actually demand too much of an engraver to take an r4*7
event, check whether and how many full or partial measures are in its
duration, write full-bar or multi-measure rests for all parts spanning
full measures and normal rests for the remainder?
What about "is fundamentally different in meaning" was unclear? The
rests have completely different visuals, not "just" different alignments
and different numbers of grobs.
Forgive my ignorance, but I don’t know what part of this an engraver
can’t do. Completion_rests_engraver checks for barlines and prints one
or multiple rests depending on these. Suppose someone™ made the effort
and folded Multi_measure_rest_engraver into Rest_engraver, why would
such an engraver be fundamentally able to take just one type of rest and
Do The Right Thing™, using ordinary rests or MMRs where appropriate?
Best, Simon
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user