Hello Werner, this would not be hard to get done. Here’s an experimental commit:
https://gitlab.com/vpetzel/lilypond/-/commit/5267b574d27316b7c5d45080b32200dabc5d37dc[1] Using this test: { c'8 d' r e' r f' g' r | r r r a' b' s s c'' | r r r r s s s s \break \set autoBeamRests = ##t c'8 d' r e' r f' g' r | r r r a' b' s s c'' | r r r r s s s s \break \set autoBeamRests = ##f \set autoBeamSkips = ##t c'8 d' r e' r f' g' r | r r r a' b' s s c'' | r r r r s s s s \break \set autoBeamRests = ##t c'8 d' r e' r f' g' r | r r r a' b' s s c'' | r r r r s s s s } this produces the appended result. Valentin Am Freitag, 20. Jänner 2023, 08:19:02 CET schrieb Werner LEMBERG: > >> The NR says that autobeaming doesn't work over rests. In some > >> situations this means a lot of additional work. As an example, > >> consider a piece that uses almost exclusively a saltarello-like > >> rhythm: > >> > >> > >> > >> ``` > >> \time 6/8 d8[ r d] d[ r d] > >> ``` > >> > >> > >> > >> I now wonder whether it makes sense to control this behaviour with > >> a property, and whether this behaviour (i.e., autobeaming over > >> rests) can be easily implemented at all... > > > > > > Depending on how regular this actually is, you might be able to do > > something like > > > > \version "2.24.0" > > > > \new Voice << > > { \time 6/8 d8 r d d r d } > > \repeat unfold 2 { s8[ s8 s8] } > > > > >> > > > Nice idea, thanks! However, this is far from a convenient solution in > the long run. IMHO, there are definitely valid situations where > automatic beaming over rests does make sense. > > Looking up our tracker, this is actually issue #994. > > https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/994 > > > Werner -------- [1] https://gitlab.com/vpetzel/lilypond/-/commit/5267b574d27316b7c5d45080b32200dabc5d37dc
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
