RE: double dot articulation
I should have searched the lsr for “double”; easy now that I know.
Thank you all.
Mogens
From: Klaus Blum
Sent: May 17, 2020 9:15
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: double dot articulation
Hi Mogens,
Am 17.05.2020 um 17:11 schrieb lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org:
> How do I put two dots (like .. ) over the note in
>
> \version "2.20.0"
> { c''8:32-. }
>
> (to indicate that the staccato applies to every note in the tremolo)?
There is a snippet for that subject:
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772
Is that what you need?
Cheers,
Klaus
Re: Identify included files
"Fr. Samuel Springuel" writes: >> On 16 May, 2020, at 5:31 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> The problem is that there are quite a few things in there that make no >> overwhelming sense for the task you want to solve. In order to allow >> for "snappy" init files doing specific tasks like this version of >> parse-only.ly does, one should likely move some of its content to >> declarations-init.ly or elsewhere. At the current point of time, the >> ability to set up different init files is not really something one can >> cleanly put to good use. >> >> So generally I'd be wary expecting this to continue working forever, but >> hopefully if it stops working, the necessary changes should make for a >> cleaner solution then. >> >> -- >> David Kastrup > > That’s really too bad as this is something that seems like it would > really come in handy. Certainly, as I’m learning make having > something which is equivalent to the -M flag for a C compiler would be > very handy for generating dependencies. > > Though, I did find one problem thus far: \omit seems to create > problems when placed as a context mod. In the attached file I’ve got > the two methods for getting rid of bar numbers (from the manuals). If > I use the \omit version, then processing with parse-only.ly generates > "error: not a context mod”. If I use the \remove version, then > everything is fine. Uh. I might be clearing out too many hooks here. The ones for creating output mods and context mods would likely be fine. -- David Kastrup
Re: Identify included files
> On 16 May, 2020, at 5:31 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > > The problem is that there are quite a few things in there that make no > overwhelming sense for the task you want to solve. In order to allow > for "snappy" init files doing specific tasks like this version of > parse-only.ly does, one should likely move some of its content to > declarations-init.ly or elsewhere. At the current point of time, the > ability to set up different init files is not really something one can > cleanly put to good use. > > So generally I'd be wary expecting this to continue working forever, but > hopefully if it stops working, the necessary changes should make for a > cleaner solution then. > > -- > David Kastrup That’s really too bad as this is something that seems like it would really come in handy. Certainly, as I’m learning make having something which is equivalent to the -M flag for a C compiler would be very handy for generating dependencies. Though, I did find one problem thus far: \omit seems to create problems when placed as a context mod. In the attached file I’ve got the two methods for getting rid of bar numbers (from the manuals). If I use the \omit version, then processing with parse-only.ly generates "error: not a context mod”. If I use the \remove version, then everything is fine. Of course, I still get the list of files I want on the stdout, so I can totally live with this. The only difficulty is that when this occurs lilypond exits with a non-zero exit code, so any scripts I write based on this can’t use the error code to determine if the command completed successfully. ✝✝ Fr. Samuel, OSB (R. Padraic Springuel) St. Anselm’s Abbey 4501 South Dakota Ave, NE Washington, DC, 20017 202-269-2300 (c) 202-853-7036 PAX ☧ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ test.ly Description: Binary data
Re: double dot articulation
(Besides: the solution in "puntitosmarkup" came from this post (
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2019-09/msg00182.html) and
was written by Aaron Hill.)
El dom., 17 may. 2020 a las 14:13, Federico Sarudiansky ()
escribió:
> Hi Pierre,
>
> of course. I tried that. My problem (and the reason for writing "my"
> puntitosmarkup) was the need to use the \tie command to add the slur.
> I couldn't find the way to add it to the original tongue function. (I'm
> sure there will be a one-line-of-code solution for that, but
> inaccessible to me). So I re-wrote the idea using a markup function.
> Besides that, as the symbol is not symmetrical, I needed the ability to
> specify the direction. Again, I know there is a better solution.
>
> Regards!
>
> F.
>
> El dom., 17 may. 2020 a las 13:58, Pierre Perol-Schneider (<
> pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com>) escribió:
>
>> Hi Federico,
>> How about:
>>
>> \version "2.20.0"
>> % after Harm:
>> puntitosmarkup =
>> #(define-music-function (dots) (integer?)
>> #{
>> \tweak stencil
>> #(lambda (grob)
>> (let ((stil (ly:script-interface::print grob)))
>> (let loop ((count (1- dots)) (new-stil stil))
>> (if (> count 0)
>> (loop (1- count)
>> (ly:stencil-combine-at-edge new-stil X RIGHT stil
>> 0.6))
>> (ly:stencil-aligned-to new-stil X CENTER)
>> \staccato
>> #})
>>
>> \relative c' {
>> c2:8-\puntitosmarkup #4
>> }
>>
>> HTH, cheers,
>> Pierre
>>
>> Le dim. 17 mai 2020 à 18:48, Federico Sarudiansky a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> besides de LSR solution given by other user (
>>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772) I wrote this:
>>>
>>> #(define-markup-command (puntitosmarkup layout props cant) (number?)
>>>(interpret-markup layout props
>>> #{ \markup {
>>> \halign #(+ (* 2.5 cant) -6)
>>> $@(map (lambda (x) #{
>>>\markup { \hspace #0
>>> \musicglyph "scripts.staccato" }
>>> #}) (iota cant)) } #}
>>> ))
>>>
>>> \relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosmarkup #4 }
>>>
>>> I did it because I want to add a little slur below (or above) to
>>> indicate, for string players, that those notes should be played in the same
>>> bow.
>>>
>>> My approximation to that is
>>>
>>> #(define-markup-command (puntitosligadosmarkup layout props cant dir)
>>> (number? number? )
>>>(interpret-markup layout props
>>> #{ \markup {
>>> \override #(cons "direction" dir)
>>> \tie
>>> \raise #0.2
>>> \puntitosmarkup #cant } #}
>>> ))
>>>
>>> \relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #-1 c'2:8^\markup
>>> \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #1 }
>>>
>>> which seems to work in version 2.20.0.
>>>
>>> I'd really want to improve this, converting it to a script stencil in
>>> the way the solution in LSR works, but I didn't fint at least for now.
>>>
>>> Regards!
>>>
>>> F.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Re: double dot articulation
Hi Pierre,
of course. I tried that. My problem (and the reason for writing "my"
puntitosmarkup) was the need to use the \tie command to add the slur.
I couldn't find the way to add it to the original tongue function. (I'm
sure there will be a one-line-of-code solution for that, but
inaccessible to me). So I re-wrote the idea using a markup function.
Besides that, as the symbol is not symmetrical, I needed the ability to
specify the direction. Again, I know there is a better solution.
Regards!
F.
El dom., 17 may. 2020 a las 13:58, Pierre Perol-Schneider (<
pierre.schneider.pa...@gmail.com>) escribió:
> Hi Federico,
> How about:
>
> \version "2.20.0"
> % after Harm:
> puntitosmarkup =
> #(define-music-function (dots) (integer?)
> #{
> \tweak stencil
> #(lambda (grob)
> (let ((stil (ly:script-interface::print grob)))
> (let loop ((count (1- dots)) (new-stil stil))
> (if (> count 0)
> (loop (1- count)
> (ly:stencil-combine-at-edge new-stil X RIGHT stil
> 0.6))
> (ly:stencil-aligned-to new-stil X CENTER)
> \staccato
> #})
>
> \relative c' {
> c2:8-\puntitosmarkup #4
> }
>
> HTH, cheers,
> Pierre
>
> Le dim. 17 mai 2020 à 18:48, Federico Sarudiansky a
> écrit :
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> besides de LSR solution given by other user (
>> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772) I wrote this:
>>
>> #(define-markup-command (puntitosmarkup layout props cant) (number?)
>>(interpret-markup layout props
>> #{ \markup {
>> \halign #(+ (* 2.5 cant) -6)
>> $@(map (lambda (x) #{
>>\markup { \hspace #0
>> \musicglyph "scripts.staccato" }
>> #}) (iota cant)) } #}
>> ))
>>
>> \relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosmarkup #4 }
>>
>> I did it because I want to add a little slur below (or above) to
>> indicate, for string players, that those notes should be played in the same
>> bow.
>>
>> My approximation to that is
>>
>> #(define-markup-command (puntitosligadosmarkup layout props cant dir)
>> (number? number? )
>>(interpret-markup layout props
>> #{ \markup {
>> \override #(cons "direction" dir)
>> \tie
>> \raise #0.2
>> \puntitosmarkup #cant } #}
>> ))
>>
>> \relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #-1 c'2:8^\markup
>> \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #1 }
>>
>> which seems to work in version 2.20.0.
>>
>> I'd really want to improve this, converting it to a script stencil in the
>> way the solution in LSR works, but I didn't fint at least for now.
>>
>> Regards!
>>
>> F.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: double dot articulation
Hi Federico,
How about:
\version "2.20.0"
% after Harm:
puntitosmarkup =
#(define-music-function (dots) (integer?)
#{
\tweak stencil
#(lambda (grob)
(let ((stil (ly:script-interface::print grob)))
(let loop ((count (1- dots)) (new-stil stil))
(if (> count 0)
(loop (1- count)
(ly:stencil-combine-at-edge new-stil X RIGHT stil
0.6))
(ly:stencil-aligned-to new-stil X CENTER)
\staccato
#})
\relative c' {
c2:8-\puntitosmarkup #4
}
HTH, cheers,
Pierre
Le dim. 17 mai 2020 à 18:48, Federico Sarudiansky a
écrit :
> Hello,
>
> besides de LSR solution given by other user (
> http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772) I wrote this:
>
> #(define-markup-command (puntitosmarkup layout props cant) (number?)
>(interpret-markup layout props
> #{ \markup {
> \halign #(+ (* 2.5 cant) -6)
> $@(map (lambda (x) #{
>\markup { \hspace #0
> \musicglyph "scripts.staccato" }
> #}) (iota cant)) } #}
> ))
>
> \relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosmarkup #4 }
>
> I did it because I want to add a little slur below (or above) to indicate,
> for string players, that those notes should be played in the same bow.
>
> My approximation to that is
>
> #(define-markup-command (puntitosligadosmarkup layout props cant dir)
> (number? number? )
>(interpret-markup layout props
> #{ \markup {
> \override #(cons "direction" dir)
> \tie
> \raise #0.2
> \puntitosmarkup #cant } #}
> ))
>
> \relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #-1 c'2:8^\markup
> \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #1 }
>
> which seems to work in version 2.20.0.
>
> I'd really want to improve this, converting it to a script stencil in the
> way the solution in LSR works, but I didn't fint at least for now.
>
> Regards!
>
> F.
>
>
>
>
>
double dot articulation
Hello,
besides de LSR solution given by other user (
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772) I wrote this:
#(define-markup-command (puntitosmarkup layout props cant) (number?)
(interpret-markup layout props
#{ \markup {
\halign #(+ (* 2.5 cant) -6)
$@(map (lambda (x) #{
\markup { \hspace #0
\musicglyph "scripts.staccato" }
#}) (iota cant)) } #}
))
\relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosmarkup #4 }
I did it because I want to add a little slur below (or above) to indicate,
for string players, that those notes should be played in the same bow.
My approximation to that is
#(define-markup-command (puntitosligadosmarkup layout props cant dir)
(number? number? )
(interpret-markup layout props
#{ \markup {
\override #(cons "direction" dir)
\tie
\raise #0.2
\puntitosmarkup #cant } #}
))
\relative c' { c2:8 _\markup \puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #-1 c'2:8^\markup
\puntitosligadosmarkup #4 #1 }
which seems to work in version 2.20.0.
I'd really want to improve this, converting it to a script stencil in the
way the solution in LSR works, but I didn't fint at least for now.
Regards!
F.
Re: double dot articulation
Am So., 17. Mai 2020 um 17:11 Uhr schrieb Mogens Lemvig Hansen
:
>
> Hi List,
>
>
>
> How do I put two dots (like .. ) over the note in
>
>
>
> \version "2.20.0"
>
> { c''8:32-. }
>
>
>
> (to indicate that the staccato applies to every note in the tremolo)?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mogens
>
>
>
>
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772
may help?
Cheers,
Harm
Re: double dot articulation
Hi Mogens,
Am 17.05.2020 um 17:11 schrieb lilypond-user-requ...@gnu.org:
How do I put two dots (like .. ) over the note in
\version "2.20.0"
{ c''8:32-. }
(to indicate that the staccato applies to every note in the tremolo)?
There is a snippet for that subject:
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=772
Is that what you need?
Cheers,
Klaus
Re: Current octave in relative mode
Peace be with you, guys... ;-) The OP's eXample is more complicated but as far as I can tell this is what he's aiming at. Of course, I did some experimenting on my own before asking here on the list. I was aware that the problem only appears if I use my function inside a \relative statement, but not (as far as I remember) if I start a \relative expression at the same moment the function is called. And, of course, no problem in absolute mode. I was hoping to to find a solution that can deal with all of the above situations and the user doesn't have to care. That's why David's solution is perfect for my aim. I also have seen Han-Wen's function, but I could not test if it fits my needs. It did not compile without errors. Maybe it doesn't work with recent LY versions, maybe it was a mistake by me... Thanks to everyone who replied. I'm glad this list exists and I know where to find help. Cheers, Klaus
Frescobaldi 3.1.2 macOS gs error message
I get the following error using Frescobaldi 3.1.2 with LilyPond 2.21.1: Converting to ...pdf'... warning: g_spawn_sync failed (0): gs: Failed to execute child process “gs” (No such file or directory) No error when invoking lilypond from the command line No error with version 2.20 macOS 10.15.4 LilyPond 2.21.1 (Macports) LilyPond 2.20.0 (from Marnen) Frescobaldi 3.1.2 installation kind: standalone .app bundle Thomas
double dot articulation
Hi List,
How do I put two dots (like .. ) over the note in
\version "2.20.0"
{ c''8:32-. }
(to indicate that the staccato applies to every note in the tremolo)?
Thanks,
Mogens
Re: Resources For Learning Scheme?
Am Samstag, den 16.05.2020, 17:24 -0300 schrieb Caio Barros: > Em sáb., 16 de mai. de 2020 às 03:08, Jacques Peron < > catac...@hotmail.com> escreveu: > > This one, by Urs Liska, is specifically about scheme with > > LilyPond : > > https://scheme-book.ursliska.de/scheme/expressions.html > > I wasn't aware Urs wrote this book. This is very nice! Well, the use of grammatical time is misleading. Instead of "wrote" this should read "has at one point started working on this WIP resource but had to move on to other tasks before nearing anything like completion" ;-) Urs
