Ambitus snippet

I think the snippet at: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/snippets/contexts-and-engravers#contexts-and-engravers-defining-an-engraver-in-scheme_003a-ambitus-engraver is rather complex to be included in the docs: I don't see why one would want to rewrite existing capability? A

Re: Fix 1805: AmbitusAccidental needs avoid-slur, needed when the notes in the ambitus have a slur (issue 4904049)

LGTM, but the regession test needs work http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/diff/3001/input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly File input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/diff/3001/input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly#newcode3 input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly:3

Re: Fix 1805: AmbitusAccidental needs avoid-slur, needed when the notes in the ambitus have a slur (issue 4904049)

LGTM. http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/diff/3001/input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly File input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/diff/3001/input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly#newcode3 input/regression/ambitus-slur.ly:3: texidoc = "Ambitus also works

Re: Fix 1805: AmbitusAccidental needs avoid-slur, needed when the notes in the ambitus have a slur (issue 4904049)

passes Make and reg tests http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Fix 1805: AmbitusAccidental needs avoid-slur, needed when the notes in the ambitus have a slur (issue 4904049)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/diff/1/scm/define-grobs.scm File scm/define-grobs.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4904049/diff/1/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode125 scm/define-grobs.scm:125: (avoid-slur . inside) I think it would make more sense for the engravers to ignore an Ambitu

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 7/10/11 4:41 PM, "Neil Puttock" wrote: > On 10 July 2011 23:34, Carl Sorensen wrote: > >> Ahh, thanks.  Fixed now: >> >> { >>  \new Voice \with  { >>    \consists Ambitus_engraver >>    \consists Mensural_ligature_engraver > > Heh, you didn't have to do this; I meant the missing quotati

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 10 July 2011 23:34, Carl Sorensen wrote: > Ahh, thanks.  Fixed now: > > { >  \new Voice \with  { >    \consists Ambitus_engraver >    \consists Mensural_ligature_engraver Heh, you didn't have to do this; I meant the missing quotation marks around the engraver names. :) (and now you've added

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 7/10/11 3:09 PM, "Neil Puttock" wrote: > On 7 July 2011 23:22, wrote: >> On 2011/07/07 16:12:08, Neil Puttock wrote: >>> >>> LGTM, though the regtest is still a bit messy. >> >> What do you consider messy about the regtest? > > Just a few nitpicks: > > +\score{ > > + \context Staff="def

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 7 July 2011 23:22, wrote: > On 2011/07/07 16:12:08, Neil Puttock wrote: >> >> LGTM, though the regtest is still a bit messy. > > What do you consider messy about the regtest? Just a few nitpicks: +\score{ + \context Staff="default" { + \context{ + \consists Ambitus_engraver + \consists Me

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 7/9/11 7:55 PM, "colinpkcampb...@gmail.com" wrote: > This has had a 48-hour countdown, and can be pushed and closed, please. Issue 1715 issue marked fixed; Rietveld issue closed Commit: 4fd0de625eba203265241fca20c504724013f534 Thanks, Carl _

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

This has had a 48-hour countdown, and can be pushed and closed, please. Colin http://codereview.appspot.com/4667055/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/07 16:12:08, Neil Puttock wrote: LGTM, though the regtest is still a bit messy. What do you consider messy about the regtest? scm/define-grob-interfaces.scm:128: "A note-head that can become part of a ligature." note head Done Thanks, Carl http://codereview.appspot.com/4

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

LGTM, though the regtest is still a bit messy. http://codereview.appspot.com/4667055/diff/14001/scm/define-grob-interfaces.scm File scm/define-grob-interfaces.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4667055/diff/14001/scm/define-grob-interfaces.scm#newcode128 scm/define-grob-interfaces.scm:1

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/05 19:58:38, Neil Puttock wrote: Erm, can I take back what I said yesterday? :) This looks really weird now, since it appears we're acknowledging ligature grobs. I think ligature-head-interface would be less confusing for the acknowledgers. Not only did it look really weird,

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/04 22:31:18, Carl wrote: OK, so I've added ligature-interface to NoteHead, and everything seems to work now. Erm, can I take back what I said yesterday? :) This looks really weird now, since it appears we're acknowledging ligature grobs. I think ligature-head-interface would be

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/04 21:22:58, Neil Puttock wrote: On 4 July 2011 21:57, wrote: > We already have the unused ligature-interface.  What if I just added > ligature-interface to NoteHead? Sounds fine to me. OK, so I've added ligature-interface to NoteHead, and

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 4 July 2011 21:57, wrote: > The original way you suggested was to have two internal_has_interface () > calls; this one only adds one. But for the invalid heads, all three calls would be made (and of course, for a NoteHead itself only the first interface check will ever happen, so the other c

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/04 20:30:10, Neil Puttock wrote: On 2011/07/04 01:54:40, Carl wrote: > Instead of filtering out bad events, I chose to filter in only events with > ligature interfaces. That's a lot of internal_has_interface () calls. :) I wondered about that. But I think the first one that is

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/04 01:54:40, Carl wrote: Instead of filtering out bad events, I chose to filter in only events with ligature interfaces. That's a lot of internal_has_interface () calls. :) You might as well create a new interface just for NoteHead (e.g., ligature-head-interface). Cheers, Neil h

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

Instead of filtering out bad events, I chose to filter in only events with ligature interfaces. I'm not sure my line-breaking is correct on the internal_has_interface () calls, but we'll soon have fixcc.py working, right? :) If it isn't right, please help me know how to fix it. I also trimmed t

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

Passes make and reg test James http://codereview.appspot.com/4667055/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

"? As long as I'm working on it I might as > well get it right. Use info.grob ()->internal_has_interface ("...") to filter out the AmbitusNoteHead and PitchTrillGroup (via ambitus-interface and axis-group-interface). Oops, TrillPitchGroup. http://codereview.appspot.com/4

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

l_has_interface ("...") to filter out the AmbitusNoteHead and PitchTrillGroup (via ambitus-interface and axis-group-interface). http://codereview.appspot.com/4667055/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

On 2011/07/03 21:25:58, Neil Puttock wrote: Hi Carl, This LGTM, though the regtest could do with a bit of tidying. Yeah, I thought of that, but I was too lazy. I just took what was in the tracker. OK, I'll trim it up some more. A more correct approach would be to filter interfaces since

Re: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

Hi Carl, This LGTM, though the regtest could do with a bit of tidying. A more correct approach would be to filter interfaces since the Ligature_engraver also potentially acknowledges PitchTrillGroup. It's probably not worth the bother though: it does have an event-cause and is ignored by the li

Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) (issue4667055)

Reviewers: , Message: Here is a proposed patch for fixing issue 1715. It works by checking for event-cause before acknowledging a notehead, thus ignoring AmbitusNoteHeads Description: Fix segfault with ambitus and ligature (Issue 1715) Check for an event-cause before acknowledging note_head

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

Hi Janek, I'd be much happier with this change if you used a callback for 'gap instead of inserting new code into the print function. That way it's easy for users to override the default behaviour without adding more properties. Cheers, Neil http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

On Jun 21, 2011, at 3:31 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote: > 2011/6/21 m...@apollinemike.com : >> What I meant is that every time you use a magic number (i.e. 0.35), >> consider making it user-tweakable unless you are absolutely sure >> that there is no utility in changing that number. > > Ah, you meant t

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

2011/6/21 m...@apollinemike.com : > What I meant is that every time you use a magic number (i.e. 0.35), > consider making it user-tweakable unless you are absolutely sure > that there is no utility in changing that number. Ah, you meant this! :) well, i think that 0.35 in (ly:grob-property grob 'g

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

- Original Message - From: "Janek Warchoł" Have you zoomed the output to check it? I suppose its a rasterization problem; a lot of things seem to be wrong when output is watched unzoomed on a computer screen (for example one stem in the attachment looks two times thicker than the other,

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

On Jun 21, 2011, at 3:04 PM, lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com wrote: > > http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm > File scm/define-grobs.scm (right): > > http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode141 > scm/define-grobs.scm:141: (wo

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

tested the gap adjustment for several intervals. For a fifth: > > \new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } { >    c' g' > } > > the bottom of the ambitus line is very close to the lower note in the > default case. Is this on purpose? I would expect the ambi

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

2011/6/17 James Lowe : > Hello > > What about 'glyph-space-distance-within-staff-affinity-thing'? cheek> > Isn't that more in keeping with the new spacing terminology. Huh? I don't understand. The <> tags don't match! :P ___ lilypond-devel mailing l

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm File scm/define-grobs.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode141 scm/define-grobs.scm:141: (woot . 1) On 2011/06/17 07:18:49, MikeSol wrote: This seems like 1337 $p34k - I ha

RE: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

...@googlemail.com; mts...@gmail.com; t.dani...@treda.co.uk; mikesubel...@otherinbox.com Cc: re...@codereview.appspotmail.com; lilypond-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041) Thanks for the ideas, Karin. They triggered another one for me. C

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

Good work! A few comments below. http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm File scm/define-grobs.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode141 scm/define-grobs.scm:141: (woot . 1) This seems like 1337 $p34k - I have ne

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

On 6/16/11 4:53 PM, "karin.hoeth...@googlemail.com" wrote: > Hi Janek, > > the description explains clearly how to use the parameters gap and woot. > So, it is a good starting point to understanding the scheme code that > follows. > >> I added a parameter which controlls this, but no reasonable

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

to change the description in output-lib.scm. Finally, I tested the gap adjustment for several intervals. For a fifth: \new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } { c' g' } the bottom of the ambitus line is very close to the lower note in the default case. Is this on purpose? I would

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

2011/6/13 Trevor Daniels : Janek Warchoł wrote Monday, June 13, 2011 2:51 PM 2011/6/13  : a) It would be better to honour the value of 'gap if this is set by the user, rather than change a specifically requested gap value. My rationale is that it wouldn't make sense to set a big gap and

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

x27; } While gap=0.7 works fine for big ambituses (one can easily imagine that a user may wish such a value), the ambitus of sixth looks ridiculous without any line inside. I suppose that if someone would like that "look", he would probably switch the line off entirely. And for small gap t

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

Ambitus_engraver } { \override Staff.AmbitusLine #'gap = #0.7 c' e'' } \new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } { \override Staff.AmbitusLine #'gap = #0.7 a a'' } While gap=0.7 works fine for big ambituses (one can easily imagine that a user may wish

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

Thanks - much clearer! Two points: a) It would be better to honour the value of 'gap if this is set by the user, rather than change a specifically requested gap value. b) I don't understand why quanting is desired. An ambitus doesn't align with anything. What is you

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

On 2011/06/13 08:01:22, Trevor Daniels wrote: The interpersed comments make it very difficult to read the code. Could you place an abridged summary at the top instead? Done. I write a lot of comments so that rookies like me would be able to understand the code in finite time, if they happen to

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

The interpersed comments make it very difficult to read the code. Could you place an abridged summary at the top instead? http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listi

Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

Oops, i added wrong Mike... Here is the code i used for testing; i attach a pdf compiled with my fix: \new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } { \override Staff.AmbitusLine #'gap = #0.45 c' f' } \new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } { \override Staff.AmbitusLine #'gap

ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)

Reviewers: Mike, Description: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines Until now, it was not possible to have all ambits look good: either the gaps between ambit line and heads were too big for ambits of 4th and 5th, or they were too small for other ambits. This patch intro

Re: Fix issue 1376 ambitus two accidentals. (issue4099044)

On 2011/01/23 22:35:02, Neil Puttock wrote: Sorry Graham, my comment on the regtest should've been clearer: I wasn't proposing we add that information to the test (since it only applies to the new case fixed by this patch); it's just that the original text is ambiguous (the part about two n

Re: Fix issue 1376 ambitus two accidentals. (issue4099044)

LGTM. Carl http://codereview.appspot.com/4099044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Fix issue 1376 ambitus two accidentals. (issue4099044)

On 2011/01/23 18:21:11, Graham Percival wrote: I've uploaded patchset 3, which I believe fixes all these. Sorry Graham, my comment on the regtest should've been clearer: I wasn't proposing we add that information to the test (since it only applies to the new case fixed by this patch); it's jus

Re: Fix issue 1376 ambitus two accidentals. (issue4099044)

Reviewers: Neil Puttock, Message: On 2011/01/23 18:00:23, Neil Puttock wrote: LGTM. Thanks! I've uploaded patchset 3, which I believe fixes all these. Cheers, - Graham Description: Fix issue 1376 ambitus two accidentals. Add regtest for 1376 ambitus accidentals. When an ambitus con

Fix issue 1376 ambitus two accidentals. (issue4099044)

iew.appspot.com/4099044/diff/1/lily/ambitus-engraver.cc File lily/ambitus-engraver.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4099044/diff/1/lily/ambitus-engraver.cc#newcode184 lily/ambitus-engraver.cc:184: && !((p.steps () == other.steps ()) indent http://codereview.appspot.com/4099

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Carl Sorensen writes: > On 8/28/09 10:56 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote: > >> Carl Sorensen writes: >> >>> On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:16 PM, "Nicolas Sceaux" >>> wrote: >>> According to R5RS, it is an error to modify a literal list. If a function returns '(), the caller won't be allowe

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

On 8/28/09 10:56 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote: > Carl Sorensen writes: > >> On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:16 PM, "Nicolas Sceaux" >> wrote: >> >>> >>> According to R5RS, it is an error to modify a literal list. >>> If a function returns '(), the caller won't be allowed to >>> apply a modifying funct

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Le 29 août 09 à 06:56, David Kastrup a écrit : Carl Sorensen writes: On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:16 PM, "Nicolas Sceaux" wrote: According to R5RS, it is an error to modify a literal list. If a function returns '(), the caller won't be allowed to apply a modifying function on the result (eg. a

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Carl Sorensen writes: > On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:16 PM, "Nicolas Sceaux" > wrote: > >> >> According to R5RS, it is an error to modify a literal list. >> If a function returns '(), the caller won't be allowed to >> apply a modifying function on the result (eg. append!) >> > > IIUC, '() is not a li

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

On Aug 28, 2009, at 1:16 PM, "Nicolas Sceaux" wrote: > > According to R5RS, it is an error to modify a literal list. > If a function returns '(), the caller won't be allowed to > apply a modifying function on the result (eg. append!) > IIUC, '() is not a literal list, but a constant that rep

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Le 27 août 09 à 22:38, Neil Puttock a écrit : 2009/8/26 Carl Sorensen : The patch looks good to me. Cheers. You code the empty list as (list). I typically code the empty list as '(). It there a preference? I suspect that we ought to be consistent, although it's not highly important.

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

2009/8/26 Carl Sorensen : > The patch looks good to me. Cheers. > You code the empty list as (list).  I typically code the empty list as '(). > > It there a preference?  I suspect that we ought to be consistent, although > it's not highly important.  It could be part of the code janitor work, >

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

'() is preferred, as it evaluates to a constant. (list) is a function call, which might mean different things if you override the definition of list. On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: > You code the empty list as (list).  I typically code the empty list as '(). > > It there a

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

On 8/25/09 2:28 PM, "Neil Puttock" wrote: > Hi, > > I've just posted a revised patchset which deals with Han-Wen's comments. > > http://codereview.appspot.com/110047/show The patch looks good to me. I have a question about style, though. You code the empty list as (list). I typically cod

Re: Move ambitus print callback to scheme.

2009/8/26 : > I still indentation diffs though. OK, I've redone the indentation in ambitus-engraver.cc using hard tabs to match the current behaviour. Regards, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org

Re: Move ambitus print callback to scheme.

LGTM I still indentation diffs though. http://codereview.appspot.com/110047 ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: [PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Hi, I've just posted a revised patchset which deals with Han-Wen's comments. http://codereview.appspot.com/110047/show Thanks, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Move ambitus print callback to scheme.

/codereview.appspot.com/110047/diff/1/11#newcode801 Line 801: (ly:grob-suicide! grob)) it would be nice to explicitly return something, eg '() in the suicide case - with all the nesting it is hard to tell what the final result is. OK. Thanks, Neil Description: Move ambitus print

Move ambitus print callback to scheme.

Nice to see this type of code migrate to Scheme. http://codereview.appspot.com/110047/diff/1/11 File scm/output-lib.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/110047/diff/1/11#newcode778 Line 778: (ly:grob-suicide! grob) this does not make sense. did you forget to check the length of the noteh

[PATCH] Move ambitus print callback to scheme

Hi, Please review this patch, which implements ambitus::print in output-lib.scm and removes the hard-coded ambitus length via the property 'gap. http://codereview.appspot.com/110047/show Thanks, Neil ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-

Split ambitus engraver?

Hi, I use Lilypond to make diagrams of all the available notes on an accordion. For that I use a single system and switch from bass clef to violin clef (and it would also be feasible to use 8va and 8ve modifiers). Now the problem is that the ambitus is engraved using the first clef of the

Re: Shouldn't the ambitus engraver prefer his key signature?

"Anthony W. Youngman" writes: > In message <863aeipe74@lola.quinscape.zz>, David Kastrup > writes >> >>Hi, >> >>the ambitus engraver seemingly picks the first maximum/minimum in the >>note sequence and stays with it even when the same ab

Re: Shouldn't the ambitus engraver prefer his key signature?

In message <863aeipe74@lola.quinscape.zz>, David Kastrup writes Hi, the ambitus engraver seemingly picks the first maximum/minimum in the note sequence and stays with it even when the same absolute pitch comes up later with a better match to the ambitus engraver's key signatur

Shouldn't the ambitus engraver prefer his key signature?

Hi, the ambitus engraver seemingly picks the first maximum/minimum in the note sequence and stays with it even when the same absolute pitch comes up later with a better match to the ambitus engraver's key signature. Here is a real world example where the ambitus engraver (which is working

Re: Cautionary accidentals in Ambitus

size-change = ##t \time 4/4 \clef bass \key des \major des aes des aes | } \layout{ \context { \Voice \consists Ambitus_engraver } } } /Mats Cameron Horsburgh wrote: Hi folks, I've recently written a timpani part for a score I'm writing, and I thought

Re: Cautionary accidentals in Ambitus

{    poet = \markup { \tuning }}I know it doesn't answer your question, but I thought you might find it interesting anyway. Regards,  Erlend AaslandOn 5/20/06, Cameron Horsburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi folks,I've recently written a timpani part for a score I'm writing, a

Cautionary accidentals in Ambitus

Hi folks, I've recently written a timpani part for a score I'm writing, and I thought I'd add an ambitus to the beginning of the part to show the necessary tuning (I know, it's not standard!) The two notes I want the timps tuned to are aes and des, and the key is des maj

Re: [bug] Ambitus broken as of 2.5.2

>>>>> "Juergen" == Juergen Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Juergen> BTW., not only my Latin dictionary, but also Webster's Juergen> says that the plural of "ambitus" is "ambitus" (with long Juergen> "u"), n

[bug] Ambitus broken as of 2.5.2

Hi! On the lilypond.org website, in section 5.11.7 of the notation manual, version 2.5.2, ambitus does not show noteheads. Maybe, this is also related to the introduction of the symmetric/up/down noteheads in 2.5.2? BTW., not only my Latin dictionary, but also Webster's says that the p

ambitus

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > This really hurts: fixed. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ Lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

ambitus

This really hurts: The term ambitus (plural: ambituses) denotes a range of pitches for ^ a given voice in a part of music. It also may denote the pitch range that a musical instrument is capable of playing. The plural of `ambitus' is `am

Re: [PATCH] Bugfix: Ambitus (Was: Re: ambitus and G_8)

>>>>> "Juergen" == Juergen Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Juergen> On 11 Jul 2002, Laura Conrad wrote: >> >> When I print the attached file, the ambitus is an octave too high. It >> may be something wierd I'm doing,

[PATCH] Bugfix: Ambitus (Was: Re: ambitus and G_8)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > Should be fixed with the attached diff. Actually, this was not a problem > with some specific clefs, but rather yet another problem related to the thanks, applied. > BTW., your file produces (at least on my machine here) many errors like: > > programming erro

Re: [PATCH] Bugfix: Ambitus (Was: Re: ambitus and G_8)

Sorry, I forgot the ChangeLog. Greetings, Juergen --- ChangeLog~ Mon Jul 22 14:24:43 2002 +++ ChangeLog Tue Jul 23 20:22:31 2002 @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2002-07-23 Juergen Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> + + * lily/ambitus-engraver.cc: bugfix: create ambitus grob during + process

[PATCH] Bugfix: Ambitus (Was: Re: ambitus and G_8)

On 11 Jul 2002, Laura Conrad wrote: > > When I print the attached file, the ambitus is an octave too high. It > may be something wierd I'm doing, since I've seen the ambitus engraver > work on other files with a G_8 clef, but I don't see what. > Should b

Re: ambitus and G_8

On 11 Jul 2002, Laura Conrad wrote: > > When I print the attached file, the ambitus is an octave too high. It > may be something wierd I'm doing, since I've seen the ambitus engraver > work on other files with a G_8 clef, but I don't see what. > Sounds as if f

Re: ambitus questions

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > Yes, this is one of a couple of known issues regarding spacing and > collision handling (see comments in lily/ambitus*.cc for details). You > may try to tweak some of the space-alist values (search for "ambitus" in > scm/grob-descriptio

ambitus and G_8

When I print the attached file, the ambitus is an octave too high. It may be something wierd I'm doing, since I've seen the ambitus engraver work on other files with a G_8 clef, but I don't see what. tenor.ly Description: Binary data -- Laura (mailto:[EMAIL PR

Re: ambitus questions

On 11 Jul 2002, Laura Conrad wrote: > > I'm enjoying using the new ambitus engraver; it's fun having that > information available by default, without having to do the stuff my > incipit-writing script does to get it from the MIDI file. > Thanks. It's always nice

ambitus questions

I'm enjoying using the new ambitus engraver; it's fun having that information available by default, without having to do the stuff my incipit-writing script does to get it from the MIDI file. My first reaction looking at it is that it's a little too close to the clef. Is this

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Since I will keep setting a link lilypond to point to the > current build-dir and I'd prefer to get all settings correct > by just changing this single link, Yes. I had that setup too, and I thought it sucked, because you can't run 1.4 and 1.5 along

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Mats Bengtsson wrote: > ... > Since I will keep setting a link lilypond to point to the > current build-dir and I'd prefer to get all settings correct > by just changing this single link, I'd actually prefer if the > directory was /share/lilypond/, i.e. with no > version sp

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

> Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Yes, the build directory is definitely not according to TDS. > [..] > > What I have done is to run directly from the build directory, > > using a local texmf-like directory with soft links to the > > corresponding directories in the build direc

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Yes, the build directory is definitely not according to TDS. [..] > What I have done is to run directly from the build directory, > using a local texmf-like directory with soft links to the > corresponding directories in the build directory. Uh, we

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

> > > On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > > > Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > This is nonsence. If the TEXMF variable doesn't include > > > the default teTeX texmf tree, TeX or LaTeX won't be able > > > to find any of the standard package files. > > > > Oops. S

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > This is nonsence. If the TEXMF variable doesn't include > > the default teTeX texmf tree, TeX or LaTeX won't be able > > to find any of the standard package files. > > Oops. So, make that: > >

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

> > Also, since the build directory doesn't match the > > standard TeX directory structure (see `texdoc tds`), > > tex/latex won't find any of the font files or other > > necessary files. > > How is that? .62/latest CVS should create a valid tds in the build > directory, but I'm not a guru at

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > This is nonsence. If the TEXMF variable doesn't include > the default teTeX texmf tree, TeX or LaTeX won't be able > to find any of the standard package files. Oops. So, make that: TEXMF="{$(pwd)/lilypond/share/lilypond/, $(kpsexpand \$TEXMF)}

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

> Running lilypond from the build dir should now (.62) be as easy as: > > ./configure; make > export TEXMF=$(pwd)/share/lilypond/ # build dir version This is nonsence. If the TEXMF variable doesn't include the default teTeX texmf tree, TeX or LaTeX won't be able to find any of the stan

Re: [PATCH] ambitus engraver

Juergen Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Sorry for the long delay of > several weeks; but I still have severe teTeX problems since lily 1.5.59. > Currently, I have to manually tweak TEXMF and TEXINPUTS and/or set up > various symbolic links to work around font problems. Do you run lilypond f

[PATCH] ambitus engraver

Hi, all! Here finally comes the ambitus engraver. Sorry for the long delay of several weeks; but I still have severe teTeX problems since lily 1.5.59. Currently, I have to manually tweak TEXMF and TEXINPUTS and/or set up various symbolic links to work around font problems. This is the last new