Comment #12 on issue 586 by plros...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I don't think there is any bug that puts the slur start on the wrong
staff. Try adding this:
#(set-global-staff-size 20)
Now change the number
Updates:
Status: Verified
Comment #10 on issue 586 by k-ohara5...@oco.net: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Verified with 2.15.23
No more notes left of time signature. Default slur is as reasonable as
possible, with the
Comment #11 on issue 586 by paconet@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes
a weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Looking at that slur, one tends to believe that it thinks the starting
notehead is on the upper staff. Here I have put them effectively there
Comment #9 on issue 586 by paconet@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
No odd messajes with latest master, stems are OK and output is as example
image, bad slur and bad tuplet bracket.
Comment #5 on issue 586 by colingh...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I just tried the original sample with 2.15.23 and it doesn't seem to be
working. See attached console output and preview.
Attachments:
Comment #7 on issue 586 by colingh...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Might be my mistake, as I used staging to build 2.15.23. I had the
impression that commits are pushed by the devs to staging.
Comment #8 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
That's fine - the two branches will usually yield equivalent results (they
rarely differ by more than a few commits at a time).
I just compiled with
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #4 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
I take it back - I didn't realize that the E was in the tuplet. So the
bracket is correct. Marking as fixed.
Comment #2 on issue 586 by mts...@gmail.com: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
As far as I can tell, this issue is fixed in the current master with the
most recent slur work. I do, however, think that the tuplet bracket's
slope
Updates:
Owner: ---
Comment #1 on issue 586 by percival.music.ca: Cross-staff slur causes a
weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
Looks like issue 307, but it still deserves a picture.
Attachments:
foo.preview.png 12.8 KB
--
You received this
Actually, the bug report should perhaps be split into two bug reports, since
the notes starting too early happen even if you remove the slur.
/Mats
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Issue 586: Cross-staff slur causes a weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
New issue
Issue 586: Cross-staff slur causes a weird output
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=586
New issue report by v.villenave:
% this example shows an extremely ugly slur
% (which can be much improved by setting #'positions
% to almost any value) but above all puts the first notes to
12 matches
Mail list logo
