Re: Issue 1055 in lilypond: guile 2.0

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Updates:
Labels: Performance

Comment #12 on issue 1055 by hanwenn: guile 2.0
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1055

Guile 1.9 now uses Boehm GC, so I am mystified: the mark routines should  
not be called at all, AFAIK.  Can you check how code linking against Guile  
1.9 is supposed to handle garbage collection?




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 1055 in lilypond: guile 2.0

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 


Comment #11 on issue 1055 by pnorcks: guile 2.0
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1055

One more problem.  With GUILE git (and previous 1.9 versions, IIRC), there  
are some new "parsed object should be dead" errors.  These appear when  
compiling a single file.


programming error: Parsed object should be dead: static scm_unused_struct*  
Prob::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)

continuing, cross fingers
programming error: Parsed object should be dead: static scm_unused_struct*  
Context_def::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)

continuing, cross fingers
programming error: Parsed object should be dead: static scm_unused_struct*  
Grob::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)

continuing, cross fingers
programming error: Parsed object should be dead: static scm_unused_struct*  
Lily_lexer::mark_smob(scm_unused_struct*)

continuing, cross fingers



___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 1055 in lilypond: guile 2.0

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 


Comment #10 on issue 1055 by pnorcks: guile 2.0
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1055

Han-Wen,

With GUILE git, the crashes seem to be occurring less regularly...

I have been copying all of the regression tests into a directory, and then  
running


  $ lilypond *.ly

Strangely (or maybe not), crashes happen less often when running

  $ lilypond --verbose

so I rarely ever have a chance to capture backtraces.  The same thing  
happens when running LilyPond through GDB.


Attached is an example of another type of crash that never happens while  
using --verbose.


Attachments:
accidental-clef-change.log  302 bytes


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 266 in lilypond: midi output for crescendi on skips fails

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Updates:
Status: Accepted
Owner: ---

Comment #5 on issue 266 by percival.music.ca: midi output for crescendi on  
skips fails

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=266

Nobody is currently working on this issue.


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 708 in lilypond: convert-ly fails to convert keySignature

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Updates:
Status: Accepted
Owner: ---

Comment #9 on issue 708 by percival.music.ca: convert-ly fails to convert  
keySignature

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=708

I don't believe that anybody is currently working on this.


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 612 in lilypond: spacing problem in tied chords with accidentals

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Updates:
Status: Accepted
Owner: ---
Labels: -Patch

Comment #7 on issue 612 by percival.music.ca: spacing problem in tied  
chords with accidentals

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=612

Ok, I consider the patch officially not-to-be-used, so I'll revert this  
item to the default status.



___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

programming errors: "Object is not a markup." and "I am not spanned!"

2010-09-30 Thread Marnix Klooster 
L.S.,

For the following file

\version "2.12.4"
{ R\breve\fermata }

lilypond reports the following "programming error":

$ lilypond bug.ly
GNU LilyPond 2.12.4
Processing `bug.ly'
Parsing...
Interpreting music...
Preprocessing graphical objects...
programming error: Object is not a markup.
continuing, cross fingers
This object should be a markup: ()
Finding the ideal number of pages...
Fitting music on 1 page...
Drawing systems...
programming error: cannot align on self: empty element
continuing, cross fingers
Layout output to `bug.ps'...
Converting to `./bug.pdf'...
$ 

Even more alarming-looking,

\version "2.12.4"
{ R2 }

results in a (correct) "barcheck failed" warning, but also in an "I am not 
spanned!" error:

$ lilypond bug2.ly
GNU LilyPond 2.12.4
Processing `bug2.ly'
Parsing...
Interpreting music...
bug2.ly:2:2: warning: barcheck failed at: 1/2
{
  R2 }
Preprocessing graphical objects...
programming error: Multi_measure_rest::get_rods (): I am not spanned!
continuing, cross fingers
programming error: Object is not a markup.
continuing, cross fingers
This object should be a markup: ()
programming error: Multi_measure_rest::get_rods (): I am not spanned!
continuing, cross fingers
Finding the ideal number of pages...
Fitting music on 1 page...
Drawing systems...
Layout output to `bug2.ps'...
Converting to `./bug2.pdf'...
$

(Probably irrelevant, but I'm running under cygwin.)

Groetjes,
 <><
Marnix


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 1286 in lilypond: Output flows off bottom of page

2010-09-30 Thread David Kastrup 
lilyp...@googlecode.com writes:

> Comment #1 on issue 1286 by joeneeman: Output flows off bottom of page
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1286
>
> This is a bug in Paper_column_engraver::finalize which triggers if the
> last bar of a score is incomplete (so if you change c to c1 then it
> breaks just  fine).

Oh.  Wow.

-- 
David Kastrup


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 1286 in lilypond: Output flows off bottom of page

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 


Comment #1 on issue 1286 by joeneeman: Output flows off bottom of page
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1286

This is a bug in Paper_column_engraver::finalize which triggers if the last  
bar of a score is incomplete (so if you change c to c1 then it breaks just  
fine).



___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread David Kastrup 
David Kastrup  writes:

> I have to disagree with your assessment: the behavior of 12.3 made sense
> under the constraints the code worked with.  It was a result of its
> design decisions.  The result of 13.35 does not make sense.  As you can
> easily see by removing the markup, it is not a result of a generally
> wider spacing decision.
>
> If you think different, how about the following:

[...]

It is particularly educational to look at the distances used in the last
page.  They don't particularly look like the general spacing is intended
to be on the loose side.

-- 
David Kastrup


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread David Kastrup 
David Kastrup  writes:

> David Kastrup  writes:
>
>> I have to disagree with your assessment: the behavior of 12.3 made sense
>> under the constraints the code worked with.  It was a result of its
>> design decisions.  The result of 13.35 does not make sense.  As you can
>> easily see by removing the markup, it is not a result of a generally
>> wider spacing decision.
>>
>> If you think different, how about the following:
>
> [...]
>
> It is particularly educational to look at the distances used in the last
> page.  They don't particularly look like the general spacing is intended
> to be on the loose side.

Here a shorter recipe:

\score { \repeat unfold 480 { c'^\markup { \column { x y z } } } }

Again, compare the last page with the other pages.

-- 
David Kastrup


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"Phil Holmes"  wrote in message 
news:i82aup$9b...@dough.gmane.org...

"David Kastrup"  wrote in message

And if you really want to see some hot action, just write

\score { c }

as often as you want.  Regardless of how much of those you put into the
file, the outcome will be just a single page.


This produces the same output in 2.12.3.   I'll add it as a bug which is 
not a regression.


http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1286


--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Issue 1286 in lilypond: Output flows off bottom of page

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Status: Accepted
Owner: 
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium

New issue 1286 by PhilEHolmes: Output flows off bottom of page
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1286

Repeating

\score { c }

20 times or so causes the output to flow off the bottom of the page.  This  
is the behaviour in 2.12.3 and remains in 2.13.x



___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"David Kastrup"  wrote in message 
news:87r5gbns2g@lola.goethe.zz...

If you think different, how about the following:

test = { c'^\markup { \column { x y z } } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }

[snip]

--
David Kastrup


Now that is impressive.  As you'll see, I've raised the bug report anyway.

sig
|
v
--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"Phil Holmes"  wrote in message 
news:i82aup$9b...@dough.gmane.org...

"David Kastrup"  wrote in message

All this is rather erratic.


Agreed.  I'll add the initial issue you raised to the tracker as a 
critical, even if it's the same as the other spacing problems, since I 
guess it'll serve as an excellent test pattern.


http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1285



--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread David Kastrup 
"Phil Holmes"  writes:

> "David Kastrup"  wrote in message
> news:87vd5nny58@lola.goethe.zz...
>> "Phil Holmes"  writes:
>>
>> [Please don't write anything important below your signature, as mail
>> clients will cut this away on reply].
>
> Apologies.  I have to cut and paste my sig to the bottom and I already
> had something ready to paste, so forgot.
>
>> If you think this is all fine, take out the markup from the example and
>> get a really _tight_ fit in contrast.
>
> Wasn't saying it was fine - just that it's not a regression between
> 13.34 and 13.35 - it's a change, but compared to 12.3, 13.34 was too
> tight.  Using the test file you provided, 12.3 took 7 pages.  .31 and
> .34 (and probably others - I don't have a full set) took 5.5 pages and
> leave no room for markup.  .35 takes 10.5 pages and leaves too much
> room for markup.

I have to disagree with your assessment: the behavior of 12.3 made sense
under the constraints the code worked with.  It was a result of its
design decisions.  The result of 13.35 does not make sense.  As you can
easily see by removing the markup, it is not a result of a generally
wider spacing decision.

If you think different, how about the following:

test = { c'^\markup { \column { x y z } } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }

-- 
David Kastrup


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Issue 1285 in lilypond: Erratic spacing between staves

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Status: Accepted
Owner: 
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Critical Regression

New issue 1285 by PhilEHolmes: Erratic spacing between staves
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1285

With this code:

test = { c' ^\markup { ! }}
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
\score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }

2.12.3 produces well-spaced staves fitting exactly on 2 pages.  2.13.31  
and .34 produce very tightly spaced staves taking less than 2 pages.   
2.13.35 now produces very loosely spaced staves over-flowing onto a 3rd  
page.  See the attached images for comparisons.


Attachments:
SpacingProb2.12.3.png  7.2 KB
SpacingProb2.13.34.png  6.5 KB
SpacingProb2.13.35.png  7.3 KB


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"David Kastrup"  wrote in message 
news:87vd5nny58@lola.goethe.zz...

"Phil Holmes"  writes:

[Please don't write anything important below your signature, as mail
clients will cut this away on reply].


Apologies.  I have to cut and paste my sig to the bottom and I already had 
something ready to paste, so forgot.



If you think this is all fine, take out the markup from the example and
get a really _tight_ fit in contrast.


Wasn't saying it was fine - just that it's not a regression between 13.34 
and 13.35 - it's a change, but compared to 12.3, 13.34 was too tight.  Using 
the test file you provided, 12.3 took 7 pages.  .31 and .34 (and probably 
others - I don't have a full set) took 5.5 pages and leave no room for 
markup.  .35 takes 10.5 pages and leaves too much room for markup.



The current spacing is not a matter of "too tight" or "too loose".  It
is a matter of "too unpredictable".


Agreed.  There are currently 2 critical bugs outstanding against spacing 
issues.



And if you really want to see some hot action, just write

\score { c }

as often as you want.  Regardless of how much of those you put into the
file, the outcome will be just a single page.


This produces the same output in 2.12.3.   I'll add it as a bug which is not 
a regression.



All this is rather erratic.


Agreed.  I'll add the initial issue you raised to the tracker as a critical, 
even if it's the same as the other spacing problems, since I guess it'll 
serve as an excellent test pattern.


--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: Issue 1284 in lilypond: \revertTimeSignatureSettings does not revert all settings

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Updates:
Status: Started
Owner: Carl.D.Sorensen

Comment #1 on issue 1284 by Carl.D.Sorensen: \revertTimeSignatureSettings  
does not revert all settings

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1284

2.13.33 also worked correctly


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread David Kastrup 
"Phil Holmes"  writes:

[Please don't write anything important below your signature, as mail
clients will cut this away on reply].

If you think this is all fine, take out the markup from the example and
get a really _tight_ fit in contrast.

The current spacing is not a matter of "too tight" or "too loose".  It
is a matter of "too unpredictable".

And if you really want to see some hot action, just write

\score { c }

as often as you want.  Regardless of how much of those you put into the
file, the outcome will be just a single page.

All this is rather erratic.

-- 
David Kastrup


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 



--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad


"Graham Percival"  wrote in message 
news:aanlktimeamkjghtqa6jljbwzkx1et41pf2zhi68bu...@mail.gmail.com...

Woah, sorry, I didn't realize that by "current code", you mean
"current git" instead of "2.13 in general".  Yeah, this isn't good!

Bug Squad: this is a Critical regression which occurred between
2.13.34 and 2.13.35.

Cheers,
- Graham


The spacing for 13.34 was too tight if we compare with 12.3.  It's now gone 
the other way.  See attached PNGs.  You still reckon this is critical 
regression? 
<><><>___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: What's with the spacing code?

2010-09-30 Thread Graham Percival 
Woah, sorry, I didn't realize that by "current code", you mean
"current git" instead of "2.13 in general".  Yeah, this isn't good!

Bug Squad: this is a Critical regression which occurred between
2.13.34 and 2.13.35.

Cheers,
- Graham


On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 1:34 PM, David Kastrup  wrote:
>
> Here is one example that gets rather spread out:
>
> test = { c'^\markup{!} }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
> \score { \repeat unfold 48 { \test } }
>
>
> --
> David Kastrup
>
>
> ___
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> lilypond-de...@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
>

___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: vertical spacing below last staff on page and lyrics

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"Martin Tarenskeen"  wrote in message 
news:loom.20100930t110556-...@post.gmane.org...

I'm not top posting


Hi,

In the following example the spacing between the last staff on the page 
and the
"lyrics" below it( in this case only "---", but that does not matter ) is 
too
small. It does not collide, but I think the spacing should be identical to 
the
other staves on the the page. AT least that is what I would like. 
Identical
staves with identical notes and lyrics should have identical spacing, no 
matter

if it is the last staff on the page or not ?

In 2.12.3 the example looks fine, in 2.13.35 not, which I consider to be a
regression.

( BTW: Also http://members.tele2.nl/m.tarenskeen/tmp/khatch-err.ly still 
has the

colliding tagline using 2.13.35, just like I reported for 2.13.34. )

-- 8< --

\version "2.13.35"
\paper {
% I think this line causes my problem:
  ragged-last-bottom=##f
}

\score {
  <<
\new Staff {
  \relative c' {
\repeat unfold 10 {
  c1 | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | \break
}
  }
}
\new Lyrics {
  \lyricmode {
\repeat unfold 80 { ---1 }
  }
}
  >>
  \layout{}
}


Thanks.  The last time you posted a similar problem, I replied saying:

"Thanks.  This is, I think, the same problem as
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1252 which I am likely to
change the priority on before the end of the day."

That bug has not been fixed.   Please check the bug report before reporting 
this again.



--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

vertical spacing below last staff on page and lyrics

2010-09-30 Thread Martin Tarenskeen 
> I'm not top posting

Hi,

In the following example the spacing between the last staff on the page and the
"lyrics" below it( in this case only "---", but that does not matter ) is too
small. It does not collide, but I think the spacing should be identical to the
other staves on the the page. AT least that is what I would like. Identical
staves with identical notes and lyrics should have identical spacing, no matter
if it is the last staff on the page or not ?

In 2.12.3 the example looks fine, in 2.13.35 not, which I consider to be a
regression.

( BTW: Also http://members.tele2.nl/m.tarenskeen/tmp/khatch-err.ly still has the
colliding tagline using 2.13.35, just like I reported for 2.13.34. )

-- 8< --

\version "2.13.35"
\paper {
% I think this line causes my problem:
   ragged-last-bottom=##f
}

\score {
   <<
 \new Staff {
   \relative c' {
 \repeat unfold 10 {
   c1 | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | \break
 }
   }
 }
 \new Lyrics {
   \lyricmode {
 \repeat unfold 80 { ---1 }
   }
 }
   >>
   \layout{}
}




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Issue 1284 in lilypond: \revertTimeSignatureSettings does not revert all settings

2010-09-30 Thread lilypond 

Status: Accepted
Owner: 
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Critical Regression

New issue 1284 by PhilEHolmes: \revertTimeSignatureSettings does not revert  
all settings

http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1284

In 2.13.31 the \revertTimeSignatureSettings code resulted in reverted  
beaming behaviour.  It does not do this in 2.13.34.  See PNGs for example.   
Test code from the NR:


\score{
  \relative c' {
\repeat unfold 8 c8 |
\overrideTimeSignatureSettings
#'Score
#'(4 . 4)
#'(1 . 4)
#'(3 1)
#'((end . (((1 . 8) . (3 1)
\time 4/4
\repeat unfold 8 c8 |
\revertTimeSignatureSettings #'Score #'(4 . 4)
\time 4/4
\repeat unfold 8 c8 |
  }
}

Attachments:
RevertTime13.31.png  3.7 KB
RevertTime13.34.png  3.7 KB


___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: \revertTimeSignatureSettings broken?

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"Mark Polesky"  wrote in message 
news:693117.45850...@web83406.mail.sp1.yahoo.com...

In NR 1.2.3 "Displaying rhythms - Time signature", the
\revertTimeSignatureSettings example (the last one before
the snippets) doesn't do what I'd expect from the text:

http://kainhofer.com/~lilypond/Documentation/notation/displaying-rhythms.html#time-signature
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#l1107

- Mark


Good spot.  http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1284

--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond

Re: autobeaming in cadenza

2010-09-30 Thread Phil Holmes 
"Carl Sorensen"  wrote in message 
news:c8c8d6d4.15e1e%c_soren...@byu.edu...




On 9/29/10 11:35 AM, "Mark Polesky"  wrote:



Carl Sorensen wrote:

I think that autobeaming in cadenzas should beam according
to baseMoment, i.e. all beats should be grouped together
in baseMoment units.


The very concept of beats within a cadenza goes against the
whole idea of a cadenza in the first place.  I think a
better system would be to break beams only when the note
duration changes, and *not* after a dotted note.  But
there's simply no algorithm that will work in most cases.
The user will almost always need to do some manual beams.

One possibility to ease some of the burden for the user
would be to set up "beaming styles", not unlike the
accidental styles that we currently have.  So we could have
\groupBeats and \groupDurations, for example.


\groupBeats would require a dramatically different autobeaming algorithm.

Perhaps the best answer is to have \candezaOn turn off autbeaming.  Since
the cadenza is in free time, perhaps the composer should be responsible for
giving whatever metric hints are desired with the beam by indicating the
beaming manually.

Thanks,

Carl


Musically, that would work for me.


--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad




___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond