[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)
From: |
Alex Loomis |
Subject: |
Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s) |
Date: |
Sun, 22 Dec 2013 09:30:57 -0500 |
That could be a useful feature but should not me the default. Perhaps an
override such as
\override MultimeasureRest #'condense-all = ##t
would be helpful. That way the default would still be the intuitive way (2+2
gives two separate groups) whereas the other is still an option for those who
want it.
On Dec 22, 2013, at 6:44 AM, Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> I think one of the things that bothers me about this thread is that
>> I don't understand why, if you want a four measure rest you would
>> write 2+2. For the vast majority of cases, if there are 48 bars
>> between two rehearsal marks I'm happy to see |=48=| between them.
>> So, why write anything but R1*48 in the part in question? If there
>> *is* a reason then the input can be something different, say R1*32
>> R1*16 to produce |=32=| |=16=|.
>
> As told earlier: The input of a score should not force the appearance
> of the output. For example, I like to write one bar per line in the
> input files, interspersed with comments to structure them in five-bars
> blocks. Writing e.g. `R1*47' heavily disturbs this structure, making
> corrections after inputting the data *much* more time consuming since
> it takes longer to identify the right spot (yes, I'm a die-hard user
> which uses a plain text editor for input). In this case, it would be
> great if multi-measure rests written as
>
> % 15
> R1*5 |
> % 20
> R1*5 |
> ...
>
> could be merged properly.
>
>
> Werner
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), (continued)
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), James Harkins, 2013/12/21
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Simon Bailey, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), James Harkins, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), address@hidden, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), address@hidden, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Werner LEMBERG, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s),
Alex Loomis <=
- RE: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Kieren MacMillan, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Keith OHara, 2013/12/22
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Kieren MacMillan, 2013/12/26
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Keith OHara, 2013/12/27
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Alex Loomis, 2013/12/27
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Kieren MacMillan, 2013/12/27
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), David Kastrup, 2013/12/27
- Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s), Kieren MacMillan, 2013/12/27
- the "perfect" break-engraver (was Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)), Kieren MacMillan, 2013/12/27
- Re: the "perfect" break-engraver (was Re: [Feature Request] \compressFullBarRests improvement(s)), Jay Anderson, 2013/12/28