Christof Biebricher wrote:
On Sat, 4 Jan 2003, Daniel Taupin wrote:
Appended if my proposal for a further version of musixtex.tex.
Before posting it officially, I would like to as to all of you to test
it, in place of the T109 ot T110 versions you may have. Some command
structures
Danaiel Taupin wrote:
I'm really reluctant, once more, because of the problem of register
consumption. This make musixadd and musixmadd not compatible with
other register consuming packages, especially in LaTeX.
I agree with Daniel. I have encountered some problems with MusiXTeX
(T109) in
Christof Biebricher wrote:
Is there somebody who observes difficulties or slowing down when \including
musixadd? Otherwise it could IMO also be incorporated in musixtex.
I'm really reluctant, once more, because of the problem of register
consumption.
this is a valid concern: i
On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 11:57:37PM +0100, taupin (wanadoo-lps) wrote:
Is there somebody who observes difficulties or slowing down when \including
musixadd? Otherwise it could IMO also be incorporated in musixtex.
I'm really reluctant, once more, because of the problem of register
Hi Olivier, Don and Andre,
Olivier wrote:
[...]
the following code
\let\oldraisearp\raisearp\def\raisearp#1#2{\loffset{.8}{\oldra
isearp{#1}{#2}}}\
e24 zfs za ? r2 /
must be written on only one line in your code!
that one helped, everything is fine now...
Thanks a lot!
kind regards
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003, Rainer Dunker wrote:
On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 11:57:37PM +0100, taupin (wanadoo-lps) wrote:
Is there somebody who observes difficulties or slowing down when \including
musixadd? Otherwise it could IMO also be incorporated in musixtex.
I'm really reluctant, once more,
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 01:58:41PM +0100, Bernhard Lang wrote:
Just an idea: What about having MusiXTeX use macros instead of
registers? Sure, this would make musixtex.tex's coding somewhat more
complicated, especially where calculations are to be performed, but in
many situations, macros
It's a rather general property of musixlyr, based on the fact that the
necessary lyrics analysis (i.e. the splitting into syllables) can be
accomplished with TeX data structures only in squared-degree, not
linear, execution time (related to the length of the lyrics input).
Thus, n bytes of
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 03:59:26PM +0100, Bernhard Lang wrote:
It's a rather general property of musixlyr, based on the fact that the
necessary lyrics analysis (i.e. the splitting into syllables) can be
accomplished with TeX data structures only in squared-degree, not
linear, execution
I discover a problem with the version T111 of MusiXTeX. If you compile the
following simple code with plain TeX
---
\input musixtex
\message{\the\internote}
\bye
---
You get 2.5pt with version T110 of MusiXTeX and 0.0pt with version T111.
I discover this problem because the numbers of bars are
Hello Cataldi,
- MikTeX 2.2 under windows 98
- MetaPost version: 0.641
- pdfTeX Version 3.14159-1.00c-pretest-20020426 (MiKTeX 2.2)
- supp-pdf.tex: 2000.04.28
- supp-mis.tex: 2000.03.31
Mm... I'm in confusion. Let me compose myself.
(1) [pdftex] I had lost the files of pdfTeX
Yes, there is a bug, an incompatibility with the correction required by
Cornelius C. Noack [EMAIL PROTECTED] and the problem raise
by Olivier Vogel.
In ordrer to conciliate both, I propose the following change:
4418c4418
\noinstrum@nt1\s@l@ctinstr
---
12 matches
Mail list logo
