[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals
From: |
Mark Polesky |
Subject: |
Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals |
Date: |
Sun, 9 Aug 2009 15:36:44 -0700 (PDT) |
Dan Eble wrote:
> In case it is relevant, here is the applied function. (I know
> it's not perfect. For one thing, the double bar lines still
> consume space when they are invisible.)
This should be fixed in 2.13.4. If you're on Windows, you can try
Neil's snapshot from a couple days ago:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-08/msg00262.html
Otherwise, you could compile the current source to test it.
- Mark
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, (continued)
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Dan Eble, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Frédéric Bron, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Mark Polesky, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Trevor Daniels, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Dan Eble, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Mark Polesky, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Dan Eble, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Mark Polesky, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, David Kastrup, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals, Dan Eble, 2009/08/09
- Re: alternatives not taken into account in automatic accidentals,
Mark Polesky <=