[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Spacing bug
Re: Spacing bug
Thu, 06 Oct 2005 07:55:58 +1000
From: Erik Sandberg <address@hidden>
CC: Mats Bengtsson <address@hidden>, Wiz Aus
Subject: Re: Spacing bug
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 21:46:33 +0200
On Wednesday 05 October 2005 10.23, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> Still, I agree with you that especially the spacing between the last
> note of each measure the following bar line is too tight. As far as I
> can see, there is no way to specify a minimum distance for that setting,
> in contrast to all other spacings, for example between the time
> signature and the first note.
If the spacing gets too tight and you want it to occupy more rows, you can
also play with the
\override Score.SeparationItem #'padding
setting, see 10.1.8 in the 2.7 manual.
Ok, there's supposed to be a
r \bar "|."
at the end. Either way,there seems no question to me that the default
here is unusuable. The passage looks absolutely fine split out on to two
so I'm wondering why lilypond thinks it would be better on just one.
> > Actually one other thing - why is the duration number necessary when
> > using a dot?
> > I would expect to be able to type "c,. d16 e8 f g. a16" for the 5th
> > here, but it doesn't work.
> > The documentation doesn't suggest that the duration number is
> > but all the examples include it.
> I don't know any specific reason, but I don't think it hurts, the input
> syntax can be confusing enough anyway. Consider for example what
> c4 c. c.
> would mean if the duration numbers weren't necessary (it would be the
> same as
> c4 c4. c4..
> which probably would surprise many).
No, because I only expect the number to carry through, not the dot.
c4 c. c. would mean c4 c4. c4.
Also, the notation wouldn't gain much: It seldom happens regularly that a
quarter is followed by a dotted quarter
g4 g4. e8 e4 g g4. d8 d4 e f g a b g2.
(Even allowing that neither of us are American, that tune should at least
ring a faint bell!)
I wouldn't have thought it at all unusual for any duration note to be
followed by a dotted version of itself.
IMHO there's little point in inventing a special syntax for it.
But that's my point - to me it's special syntax that you *do* need to repeat
the duration number - it seems to be only case where it's necessary.
Anyway, not a big deal, just thought it was a bit odd.
1000s of Sexy Singles online now at Lavalife http://lavalife.com.au