Staff: vertical spacing, reduce chord name distance
IIRC in previous versions I could reduce the distance between a staff
and chord symbols by this command:
\set Staff.minimumVerticalExtent = #'(-4 . 1)
In 2.8.1 this is:
\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-4 . 1)
or did I get something wrong?
Reducing the space this way dos not work here, increasing does work.
Can anyone point me in the right direction?
Thank you
Thomas
Windows XP
code:
--
\version 2.7.40
#(set-default-paper-size a6 'landscape)
#(ly:set-option 'point-and-click #f)
#(set-global-staff-size 18)
Melody =\context Voice = Melody {
\relative c' {c4 d e r }
}
ChordSymbols = \context ChordNames
\chordmode {c1}
GuitarStaff = \context Staff
%\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-4 .
12)
% works!
\override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-4 .
1) %
does not work!
\Melody
Text = \lyricsto Melody \new Lyrics { Wet -- ter -- frosch, }
\score
{
\ChordSymbols
\GuitarStaff
\Text
\layout {}
}
\paper {}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
Hi Eyolf, Eyolf Ostrem wrote: Which frontends do yo all use for lilypond? Here's the ones I've tried out so far, with my experiences - some bad, some good: 1. NoteEdit. however: I haven't found a keyboard shortcut for \breve and \longa - essential if one writes a lot of renaissance music. Also, It would have been nice if Breve: I just added a shortcut for it, it's in the NoteEdit svn (and will be included in the 2.8.1 release coming out soon). Longa: Does NoteEdit really support it? At least I don't see how you would input it. It's not a big problem adding more shortcuts for me. one could generate a lilypond output on the fly, of whatever one has written in, without having to go through the process of exporting, opening the file, copy-pasting into the real document, etc. No problem, with the current version from SVN you can just do that. Just fine-tune your printing and preview options and you're done. You can even use a bash script or something similar as custom command for previewing or printing the file. Also, I miss things like a default score setup, a snippet/templates library, a menu for inserting more specific lilypond commands (but I realize it's not only a lilypond frontend, so that's probably too much to ask). But all in all, it's so far my favorite frontend - not for generating whole scores, but for entering the music which I can then paste into another text file. Not at all impossible, but for us it is unfortunately. We recently started on a project called Canorus that will be the NoteEdit successor. But that won't help you for quite a while. If you're interested in that, you can write your idea to the wiki (I'll create an account for you). http://canorus.berlios.de/wiki/index.php Have I missed anything? Was there mscore in your list (muse score)? I haven't looked at that though. Best, Reinhard -- Software-Engineer, Developer of User Interfaces Project: Canorus - the next generation music score editor - http://canorus.berlios.de GnuPG Public Key available on request ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Notes missing in MIDI output
If you search the mailing list archives, you will find that
it's an old well-known bug.
/Mats
Nick Prömper wrote:
Hi all!
I figured out a problem with the midi output. If you enter a crescendo without
giving anabsolute dynamic, lilypond sets the volume down to zero.
Is that a known bug, or a feature ;-) ? Is there a work-around (without giving
absolute dynamics?)
\version 2.8.1
\header {
title = Notes missing
}
Trompe = \new Staff \relative c' {
c4 d\ e f g a b\! c
%{ that works: c4 d\p\ e f g a b\f c %}
}
\score {
\Trompe
\layout {
indent = 2\cm
}
}
\score {
\Trompe
\midi {
}
}
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
--
=
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
Am 2006-04-29 um 16:23 schrieb Eyolf Ostrem: Which frontends do yo all use for lilypond? I like LilyPad by Ed Baskerville - at the moment it's only a simple editor with sync'ed PDF preview (and only available for MacOS X), but Ed is working at a much better version. I tried jEdit+LilyTool, but I couldn't solve all the Java issues. (I got it running, but it tends to crash and is much too slow on my G4/400.) Greetlings from Lake Constance --- fiëé visuëlle Henning Hraban Ramm http://www.fiee.net http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/ http://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer) ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
lilypond, lasr line in output
Hello, I just started using lilypond and also got my first outputs. In the last line always appears music engraving by lilypond Is there any way to suppress this? Doesn't look too good for some puposes... Greetings Meggy -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/lilypond%2C-lasr-line-in-output-t1535644.html#a4172230 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User forum at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond, lasr line in output
Am Montag, 1. Mai 2006 16:26 schrieb Meg200x:
Hello,
I just started using lilypond and also got my first outputs. In the last
line always appears music engraving by lilypond Is there any way to
suppress this? Doesn't look too good for some puposes...
Very easy. In the header section override the tagline. E.g.
\header {
...
tagline =
}
Nick
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
mac osx point and click editor
Hi, The current point and click function on MacOSX automatically opens the file with the LilyPond.app (10.4.6-PPC, ly2.9.2). Is there a way to change the editor that is used to open the .ly file with point and click? By putting the path to something like TextWrangler or EnhancedCarbonEmacs somewhere? I've tried changing the EDITOR in my .profile, and that hasn't seemed to do anything for me. Thanks, Sean ___ Sean Reed Hamburg, Germany www.seanreed.de ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
Citerar Graham Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Agreed. LilyPond is a domain-specific language. It is rather odd
that it is necessary to break out into a different language to do a
great many things.
2) Scheme *is* part of LilyPond language, using #, and scheme macro
and other
capabilities are indeed used. what do you think happens when one
writes:
pad = #(define-music-function (parser location padding music) (number?
ly:music?)
#{ \once \override TextScript #'padding = #$padding
$music #})
In Geoff's defense, this kind of construct _is_ more complicated (to an
end-user) than it needs to be -- why the define-music-function,
I agree. The topic pops up often enough to prove that the syntax _does_ scare
away users from using music functions. Even if users shoudln't need to be
prohibited by the syntax, they are.
why the
parser location (don't bother to explain it to me yet), etc. It
would be easier for users if we could just write
pad = #function (padnum) (number?) %{
\once \override TExtScript #'padding = #$padnum
%}
(of course, we'd still get complaints about the weird syntax)
Something like this can very easily be constructed with existing lilypond. It
sacrifices flexibility (you can only use music parameters), but is easier to
use and to understand:
foo = #(music-function 3 %{ c4 #1 r8 #2 g16 #3 %})
(foo takes 3 music parameters, #1 #2 and #3).
That said, my opinion is that users can live with it. Do the blind
copy-and-paste thing; change the TextScript to DynamicLineSpanner
or whatever you need; it's not a big deal.
I don't want to cut and paste things I don't understand; when I was new to lily
I didn't like grob property tweaking because I didn't understand where the ':s
came from. It's IMHO a good thing to abstract the syntax to a level where users
easily can understand what they are doing.
Erik
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mac osx point and click editor
Title: Re: mac osx point and click editor Click on an .ly file and do Get Info. You'll see a place where you can change the application that opens the file. Change to the application you like. There is an option to change all files of this kind to that application. Choose that. From: Sean Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 19:14:39 +0200 To: User's List LilyPond lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: mac osx point and click editor Hi, The current point and click function on MacOSX automatically opens the file with the LilyPond.app (10.4.6-PPC, ly2.9.2). Is there a way to change the editor that is used to open the .ly file with point and click? By putting the path to something like TextWrangler or EnhancedCarbonEmacs somewhere? I've tried changing the EDITOR in my .profile, and that hasn't seemed to do anything for me. Thanks, Sean ___ Sean Reed Hamburg, Germany www.seanreed.de ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
Quoting Nicolas Sceaux [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Erik Sandberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Citerar Graham Percival [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In Geoff's defense, this kind of construct _is_ more complicated (to
an end-user) than it needs to be -- why the define-music-function,
One concrete proposal of Graham has been cut out in this thread, namely
that there should be no need to specify the two first arguments, parser
and location. As far as I understand, it should be trivial to make a
version of define-music-function where the user doesn't have to add
these arguments manually, so the syntax is
#(new-define-music-function (arg1 arg2 ... ) (typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #}
}
/Mats
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
As far as I understand, it should be trivial to make a
version of define-music-function where the user doesn't have to add
these arguments manually, so the syntax is
#(new-define-music-function (arg1 arg2 ... ) (typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #}
}
I think that would satisfy most of my needs.
Geoff
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
Nice, will it will basically generate source code AFTER the \include files are merged but BEFORE compilation by LP occurs? The ability to modularize source code generation into macros would be valuable, kind of like smart \include files, where one can generate conditional LP music source code. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Macro-pre-processing--t1406795.html#a4172264 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User forum at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Staff: vertical spacing, reduce chord name distance
Thomas Scharkowski wrote: IIRC in previous versions I could reduce the distance between a staff and chord symbols by this command: \set Staff.minimumVerticalExtent = #'(-4 . 1) In 2.8.1 this is: \override Staff.VerticalAxisGroup #'minimum-Y-extent = #'(-4 . 1) or did I get something wrong? Reducing the space this way dos not work here, increasing does work. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thank you Thomas Windows XP You can see what the required code is here; you can also see a bug related to it: http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-lilypond%40gnu.org/msg07067.html In short, you need to set minimum-Y-extent to false, and then set Y-extent to an absolute value instead. But you may encounter stem-length errors on beamed notes. As far as I can tell, this problem has not yet been addressed, even in CVS. The bug was introduced when the VerticalAxisGroup interface was added to the Staff context about midway through the 2.7 development cycle. --Daniel ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Vertical spacing of lyrics
I have 2 problems with the vertical spacing of lyrics:
1.) When rendering the lilypond file below, there is very much space between
the two lyrics lines. How can I reduce that space?
2.) The third part (Lu lu ...) is should be set at the same height as the
first part (La la ...). How can I achieve that?
Attached is a picture of the rendered output
Regards,
Lothar
The lilypond file:
\score {
\context Voice = one {
\override Staff.TimeSignature #'style = #'() % 4/4
Takt-Zeichen
\clef violin
\time 4/4
\notes \relative c' {
c4 d e f
g4 f e d
}
}
\lyrics {
\lyricsto one \new Lyrics {
La la la la
}
\lyricsto one \new Lyrics {
Lo lo lo lo
}
\lyricsto one \new Lyrics {
Lu lu lu lu
}
}
}
http://www.nabble.com/user-images/2872.gif
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Vertical-spacing-of-lyrics-t1535653.html#a4172267
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User forum at Nabble.com.
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
Geoff Horton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As far as I understand, it should be trivial to make a
version of define-music-function where the user doesn't have to add
these arguments manually, so the syntax is
#(new-define-music-function (arg1 arg2 ... ) (typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #}
}
This is manageable indeed :-)
I think that would satisfy most of my needs.
???
#(new-define-music-function (arg1 arg2 ... )
(typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #})
satisfies your needs but:
#(define-music-function (parser location arg1 arg2 ... )
(typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #})
does not?
Ok so the real problem is the two extra parameters...
#(defmacro-public def-mus-fn ;; short name for short version :)
(args typechecks . body)
(let ((parser (gensym))
(location (gensym)))
`(define-music-function (,parser ,location ,@args) ,typechecks
,@body)))
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
I use an unoriginal combination of xterm, emacs, and xpdf. When I'm working on a longer project, I can set up xpdf so that it's always visible and is updated after I've run lilypond: $ emacs -nw whatever.ly (C-a C-s C-z to save and hide the editor) $ lilypond whatever.ly $ xpdf -z 100 -remote myServer whatever.pdf $ fg then after that, all i have to do is $ lilypond whatever.ly xpdf -remote myServer whatever.pdf fg which, after the first time can just be a matter of hitting the up key followed by the enter key. I've found that this is, for me, the fastest way to go. I'm sure there's a more efficient way of doing what I've just demonstrated, but I haven't figured it out yet. One of the advantages of this is that if I'm working remotely, I don't have to change my environment (well, editor), and the only thing I have to do differently is upload the resultant pdf to my web server and view through a browser. If I'm in KDE, I generally like Kate. For lilypond-book projects, I have set Kile up to make things easy. I've never really liked jEdit, so the advantages of the Lilypond tool are lost on me. For me, GUI frontends make things take longer than just starting with an editor. Josiah ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
$ emacs -nw whatever.ly (C-a C-s C-z to save and hide the editor) excuse me, that's C-x C-s to save and C-z to hide. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
... For lilypond-book projects, Ihave set Kile up to make things easy. ... How did you set up Kile? I tried to configure it to produce output with lilypond, but gave up after two hours in frustration. A small Howto would be really great! Regards, Lothar ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
Quoting Rick Hansen (aka RickH) [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nice, will it will basically generate source code AFTER the \include files are merged but BEFORE compilation by LP occurs? The ability to modularize source code generation into macros would be valuable, kind of like smart \include files, where one can generate conditional LP music source code. It won't happen exactly at that point in the processing chain, but the effect is most probably what you want. /Mats ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
Rick Hansen (aka RickH) [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Nice, will it will basically generate source code AFTER the \include files
are merged but BEFORE compilation by LP occurs? The ability to modularize
source code generation into macros would be valuable, kind of like smart
\include files, where one can generate conditional LP music source code.
May you quote the original message to which your answering? it's not
easy to guess what you're talking about? I suppose you're answering to
Geoff's post about pre processor.
In two weeks, when I'm done with finals, I'll revisit my roughed-out
preprocessor and see if it can be made usable and easy.
Anyway, smart includes are already possible with LilyPond.
For instance, it's usual to see the following in a LilyPond file:
-- pieceA/lead-score.ly --
| global = {
| \key g \major
| \time 3/4
| s2.*27 \bar |.
| }
|
| \score {
| ...
| \new Staff \global { ..music1.. }
| \new Staff \global { ..music2.. }
| ...
---
When you build several version of a score (eg. lead score, separate
parts, etc), you put the content of the global variable in its own file:
-- pieceA/global.ily --
| \key g \major
| \time 3/4
| s2.*27 \bar |.
and then, in each score file:
-- pieceA/lead-score.ly --
| global = { \include pieceA/global.ily }
| \score {
| ...
| \new Staff \global { ..music1.. }
| \new Staff \global { ..music2.. }
| ...
| }
---
But then there is a pattern, the global variable affectation repeated in
each main score file.
So you define a music function, that will automatically include the
global.ily the first time it is invoked, and the following ones just
return what has already been loaded:
Supposing that (*cuurent-piece*) holds the identifier of the piece (I
use such identifiers to distinguate the different pieces in a book, and
to designate the drectory in which the piece files are placed, pieceA
above):
global =
#(define-music-function (parser location) ()
(let* ((global-symbol (string-symbol (format global~a
(*current-piece*
(global-music (ly:parser-lookup parser global-symbol)))
(if (not (ly:music? global-music))
(let* ((global-file (string-append (*current-piece*) /global.ily)))
(set! global-music #{ \include $global-file #})
(ly:parser-define! parser global-symbol global-music)))
(ly:music-deep-copy global-music)))
[By the way, here you see an example of a music function using the
parser argument].
Then, all you have to write in your score files is:
-- pieceA/lead-score.ly --
| \score {
| ...
| \new Staff \global { ..music1.. }
| \new Staff \global { ..music2.. }
| ...
| }
---
the pieceA/global.ily file is then auto-included.
But then you have to tell lilypond the identifier of each score, so the
benefit is not evident. Let's create another function to include a piece
in the main file, which will set the identifier of the piece.
common.ily
| #(use-modules (srfi srfi-39))
| #(define *current-piece* (make-parameter ))
|
| includeScore =
| #(define-music-function (parser location name) (string?)
|(parameterize ((*current-piece* name))
| (ly:parser-parse-string (ly:clone-parser parser)
| (string-append \\include \ name
/score.ily\))
| (make-music 'SequentialMusic 'void #t)))
|
| global =
| #(define-music-function (parser location) ()
| (let* ((global-symbol (string-symbol (format global~a
(*current-piece*
| (global-music (ly:parser-lookup parser global-symbol)))
|(if (not (ly:music? global-music))
|(let* ((global-file (string-append (*current-piece*) /global.ily)))
| (set! global-music #{ \include $global-file #})
| (ly:parser-define! parser global-symbol global-music)))
|(ly:music-deep-copy global-music)))
common.ily
main.ly
| \include common.ily
|
| %% includes pieceA/score.ily and sets (*current-piece*) to pieceA
| \includeScore pieceA
| \includeScore pieceB
| ...
main.ly
pieceA/score.ily
| \score {
|
|\new Staff \global { ..music1.. }
|\new Staff \global { ..music2.. }
|
| }
pieceA/score.ily
pieceA/global.ily
| \key g \major
| \time 3/4
| s2.*27 \bar |.
pieceA/global.ily
etc.
nicolas
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
I use jEdit with lp plugin on WindowsXP, I did have to go to Sun and upgrade my java though to get it to work. And you have to go into the options for the lilypond plugin to set up the command launch lines as though you were entering them at the command prompt. The only problem with jEdit is that the editor is very slow when your lp file goes over 1 lines or so. My computer is plenty fast because I could lp compile the same 1 lines in about 7 seconds, but it takes jEdit about 30 seconds just to open the text file for editing. It must do something stupid like reading the whole file into memory instead of paging through it based on the scroll bar. Other than that its fine. Java applications generally run pretty sluggish on Windows so it was expected. For me enduring the initial pain of learning the lp syntax and using a simple text editor seems to be serving me better than adding another layer of graphical abstraction between me and lp. (this still doesn't mean that I would not like to see a macro pre-processor though, built over lp. Macros would help me to shorten up my 1 line source file by generating all this code instead of me hand coding it via copy and paste) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Which-frontend--t1529481.html#a4172288 Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User forum at Nabble.com. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Which frontend?
Thanks for all your replies to my query. It has really been helpful, in many ways. 1. I finally went through the pains of configuring emacs with lilypond-mode and lyqi (the 'pains' part comes partly from my reluctance to use emacs in the first place - I still find vim to be vastly superior as an editor - partly from some initial problems with the setup), and it's great! With lyqi, I can 'play' in the notes from the keyboard, already almost as fast as in Finale, where I have years of experience and a good technique (if I may say so), and I can only imagine the speed I will reach once I get the key presses into my fingers. I also have immediate midi playback, which is necessary for fast typing. And with the lilypond-mode, pdf generation, midi playback, and other functions are within two-three key presses (albeit involving the horrible emacs ctrl key combos, but I can live with that...). 2. I've received confirmation that my problems with jEdit are not mine alone. With emacs working its wonders, I have no need for another text-editor-based solution. Bye, jEdit - nice meeting you, but we weren't meant for eachoter. 3. NoteEdit not only seems to be the best gui alternative, but also the one where new things are happening. I will try out the latest SVN version (I'm currently running 2.8), which apparently has some of the features I have been missing. There are situations where a direct graphical interface is necessary (such as transcriptions from renaissance part-books, which I do quite a lot). Eyolf -- If Microsoft uses the breakup as an opportunity to port Office, and its infernal Dancing Paper Clip, to my Linux operating system, heads will fly! I'll track down that idiot who created Clippit and sic a killer penguin on him! -- Linus Torvalds, when asked by Humorix for his reaction to the proposed Microsoft two-way split ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mac osx point and click editor
Hi Carrick,That's the first thing I tried. It didn't work though. I chose GetInfo and changed the application to TextWrangler, and now all .ly files open in TextWrangler when I double click on them, which is great.But when I point and click at an item in a PDF file of an ly score, it still is opened by the LilyPond.app.Any other clues?Sean ___Sean ReedHamburg, Germanywww.seanreed.de On 01.05.2006, at 19:34, Carrick Patterson wrote: Click on an .ly file and do Get Info. You'll see a place where you can change the application that opens the file. Change to the application you like. There is an option to change all files of this kind to that application. Choose that. From: Sean Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 19:14:39 +0200 To: User's List LilyPond lilypond-user@gnu.org Subject: mac osx point and click editor Hi, The current point and click function on MacOSX automatically opens the file with the LilyPond.app (10.4.6-PPC, ly2.9.2). Is there a way to change the editor that is used to open the .ly file with point and click? By putting the path to something like TextWrangler or EnhancedCarbonEmacs somewhere? I've tried changing the EDITOR in my .profile, and that hasn't seemed to do anything for me. Thanks, Sean ___ Sean Reed Hamburg, Germany www.seanreed.de___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mac osx point and click editor
Sean, By following Carrick's instructions, you've told the Finder what to do with .ly files (not with files created by LilyPond). Now repeat his instructions with a .pdf file and as many other file formats that you desire. Best, Robert Sean Reed wrote: Hi Carrick, That's the first thing I tried. It didn't work though. I chose GetInfo and changed the application to TextWrangler, and now all .ly files open in TextWrangler when I double click on them, which is great. But when I point and click at an item in a PDF file of an ly score, it still is opened by the LilyPond.app. Any other clues? Sean On 01.05.2006, at 19:34, Carrick Patterson wrote: Click on an .ly file and do Get Info. You'll see a place where you can change the application that opens the file. Change to the application you like. There is an option to change all files of this kind to that application. Choose that. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Guitar Chords
I am trying to put some of my favorite songs on the guitar into lilypond. I noticed that the \chordmode creates 3 note (Piano ?) chords. Is there a way to force it to do 6 note chords by default? Is anyone out there using this for guitar (pop) music. I would like to hear how detailed you have gotten with it and what challenges that the software presented. Currently I am trying to enter a C#m chord 446654. And having a bit of a challege. Any suggestions Nick ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: mac osx point and click editor
Quoting Robert T Wyatt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sean, By following Carrick's instructions, you've told the Finder what to do with .ly files (not with files created by LilyPond). Now repeat his instructions with a .pdf file and as many other file formats that you desire. Best, Robert Sean Reed wrote: Hi Carrick, That's the first thing I tried. It didn't work though. I chose GetInfo and changed the application to TextWrangler, and now all .ly files open in TextWrangler when I double click on them, which is great. But when I point and click at an item in a PDF file of an ly score, it still is opened by the LilyPond.app. Any other clues? Sean On 01.05.2006, at 19:34, Carrick Patterson wrote: Click on an .ly file and do Get Info. You'll see a place where you can change the application that opens the file. Change to the application you like. There is an option to change all files of this kind to that application. Choose that. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user Reading Appendix D of the manual (2.8), it seems the default editor for point and click indeed CAN be changed, but the manual is -- to me, at least -- completely unclear on how to do so. It is, at least, clear to me that no fiddling with OS X (e.g. the Get Info advice I gave earlier) will accomplish what you want. There's some kind of environment variable that must be changed, and it looks like once you have done that you are in tall cotton. -- Carrick Patterson Little Rock AR ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Kile and Lilypond-Book Howto
On 5/1/06, Lothar Schmid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... For lilypond-book projects, I have set Kile up to make things easy. ... How did you set up Kile? I tried to configure it to produce output with lilypond, but gave up after two hours in frustration. A small Howto would be really great! Go to Settings - Configure Kile... - Build There are two build tools you will have to modify, LaTeX and DVItoPS, and two that you will have to create. It is worth noting that this will be set up so that your lilypond-book files will use the extension .lytex rather than .tex. Among other things, this will protect your source file from being overwritten in the compile process. First select LaTeX and click on the button that says New Config Name it lilypond-book. In the text box for Options:, enter: %S.tex go to the Advanced tab, make sure that the Type is Run Outside of Kile, the Class is LaTeX, the target extension is dvi. Next, select DVItoPS and click on the button that says New Config... and name it lilypond-book. Change the options to: -o -h '%S.psfonts' -Ppdf '%S.dvi' Go to the Advanced tab, make sure that the Type is Run Outside of Kile, the Class is Convert, the source extension is dvi, the target extension is psfonts. So far, in both of these examples, I have left some defaults alone. If this is unclear, I can elaborate. In any event, next we have to create a couple tools. So click on the button New Tool... and when prompted for a name, call it Lilypond-Book. The next window that comes up asks about default behavior. Choose LaTeX or something similar. Click on the New Config... button, and call it lilypond-book. For command, enter lilypond-book, and for options: --psfonts '%S.lytex' Go to the advanced tab. Type: Run Outside of Kile, Class: Compile, Source Extension: lytex. Now to create the final tool to put it all together. Click on the New Tool... button, name this something like QuickLilypondBook, and at the Behavior screen, select QuickBuild. Check the Advanced tab to make sure that the Type is Run Sequence of Tools and Class is Sequence. Under the General tab, click on the box next to Tool: to select Lilypond-Book, then for Configuration: select lilypond-book, and then click on Add. You should now see that Lilypond-Book (lilypond-book) has been added to the list. Again, for Tool: select LaTeX, and for Configuration: select lilypond-book, then click on Add. You should see LaTeX (lilypond-book) added to the list. Since by now you probably get the process, I will revert to shorthand. Tool: DVItoPS, Configuration: lilypond-book, Add. Tool: PStoPDF, Add. Tool: ViewPDF, Add. Note that there is no need to change the configuration for PStoPDF or ViewPDF. Also note that if you don't care to convert the PS to PDF, you can omit this step and add ViewPS instead. Go to the Menu. Add tool to Build menu: Quick. Change the icon if you like, and click on OK. Go to Settings - Configure Toolbars... select the Build toolbar, and under Available Actions, scroll down until you find QuickLilypondBook, select and drag over to Current Actions next to QuickBuild. Click the OK button. Test. Remember that QuickLilypondBook is expecting a .lytex file. If it doesn't work, please ask. Josiah ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Kile and Lilypond-Book Howto
If anyone can figure out how to set up context highlighting, that would probably be the only thing missing to this. It's not necessary, but I know that some people like to have it. Josiah ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: Macro pre-processing?
This stuff really doesn't belong on -user, but since it's here anyway,
we might as well finish the discussion here.
On 1-May-06, at 1:37 PM, Nicolas Sceaux wrote:
Geoff Horton [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Mats Bengtsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As far as I understand, it should be trivial to make a
version of define-music-function where the user doesn't have to add
these arguments manually, so the syntax is
#(new-define-music-function (arg1 arg2 ... ) (typecheck1 typecheck2
... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #}
}
This is manageable indeed :-)
Really? Hmm... what about this?
myMoveText = \function { x:numer? y:number? } {
\once \override TextScript #'padding = #x
\once \override TextScript #'extra-offset = #(0 . y)
}
If we could disguise simple scheme functions like this, many more
people would use them.
I think that would satisfy most of my needs.
???
#(new-define-music-function (arg1 arg2 ... )
(typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #})
satisfies your needs but:
#(define-music-function (parser location arg1 arg2 ... )
(typecheck1 typecheck2 ... )
#{ordinary LilyPond code using $arg1 $arg2 ... #})
does not?
In all honesty, I'm with Geoff on this one. All the #() stuff looks
scary, and having the parser location non-arguments (I mean,
they're never referenced in the actual code) was the straw that broke
my back[1]. Now that I have two+ years of at least skimming ever email
on all the mailists, I know that there's a magical parser location
thing that needs to be there, and that the real arguments come after
that.
[1] I don't know if this phrase exists in other languages. The straw
that broken the camel's back: there was one tiny problem, but even
though it was very small, it was still enough to cause failure.
I've started to address this problem in the new docs (by providing a
bunch of simple examples and explaining that they need to be there),
but it would be nice if we could remove the parser location entirely.
Ok so the real problem is the two extra parameters...
#(defmacro-public def-mus-fn ;; short name for short version :)
(args typechecks . body)
(let ((parser (gensym))
(location (gensym)))
`(define-music-function (,parser ,location ,@args) ,typechecks
,@body)))
If the super-simple version would be a pain to implement, then I vote
that we merge this. Although I'd propose def-mus-func for the name.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
