Re: accidentalStyle dodecaphonic-no-repeat
On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 12:24 PM, James pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3992 James I've figured out the problem, but I'd like to revise the dodecaphonic-no-repeat code a little while I'm at it. I've added some comments and an image to the tracker to show what I propose. --David ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
accidentalStyle dodecaphonic-no-repeat
Hi all, On my way in updating translations, I notice that this style seems to not do what it claims. Look at the two successive examples in NR-1.1.3 Automatic accidentals, both styles dodecaphonic and dodecaphonic-no-repeat: there is no difference at all. Cheers, Jean-Charles ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: accidentalStyle dodecaphonic-no-repeat
Am 05.07.2014 15:50, schrieb Jean-Charles Malahieude: Hi all, On my way in updating translations, I notice that this style seems to not do what it claims. Look at the two successive examples in NR-1.1.3 Automatic accidentals, both styles dodecaphonic and dodecaphonic-no-repeat: there is no difference at all. That's right, this is a bug, and I will look into it. I'm not on the right PC to check right now, but I strongly assume it's an issue with the doc example and not with the accidental style. Urs Cheers, Jean-Charles ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: accidentalStyle dodecaphonic-no-repeat
Am 05.07.2014 16:49, schrieb Urs Liska: Am 05.07.2014 15:50, schrieb Jean-Charles Malahieude: Hi all, On my way in updating translations, I notice that this style seems to not do what it claims. Look at the two successive examples in NR-1.1.3 Automatic accidentals, both styles dodecaphonic and dodecaphonic-no-repeat: there is no difference at all. That's right, this is a bug, and I will look into it. I'm not on the right PC to check right now, but I strongly assume it's an issue with the doc example and not with the accidental style. Urs It seems this accidental-style is actually broken. The doc example is coded correctly, and testing the accidentalstyle in a document turns out the same result. I know that it worked correctly when we added it, so it must have been broken later. So it should be added as a bug. To avoid misunderstandings: cis d cis cis d should print as cis! d! cis! \once \omit Accidental cis d! Urs ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: accidentalStyle dodecaphonic-no-repeat
On 05/07/14 18:13, Urs Liska wrote: Am 05.07.2014 16:49, schrieb Urs Liska: Am 05.07.2014 15:50, schrieb Jean-Charles Malahieude: Hi all, On my way in updating translations, I notice that this style seems to not do what it claims. Look at the two successive examples in NR-1.1.3 Automatic accidentals, both styles dodecaphonic and dodecaphonic-no-repeat: there is no difference at all. That's right, this is a bug, and I will look into it. I'm not on the right PC to check right now, but I strongly assume it's an issue with the doc example and not with the accidental style. Urs It seems this accidental-style is actually broken. The doc example is coded correctly, and testing the accidentalstyle in a document turns out the same result. I know that it worked correctly when we added it, so it must have been broken later. So it should be added as a bug. To avoid misunderstandings: cis d cis cis d should print as cis! d! cis! \once \omit Accidental cis d! Urs ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond Thanks http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3992 James ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
