ReReRe: Bug report: measure numbering after repeat with alternative endings

[Paul de Bruin]

Dear Mats, Bertalan and Graham,
 
Flooded with and surprised by instant reactions, I've given the problem (or
is it a bug?) some more thought. Two points of view are possible:
 
1. The Programmer's view. A measure of music, like any other object in
programming, should have a unique number. No ambiguity is logically allowed
or even thinkable. So, the first measure of the second piece section should
be 18.
 
2. The Musician's view. Measure 16b (2a volta) is essentially/musically the
same as measure 16a (1a volta). Moreover, this particular piece (bwv 1017)
has not only a harsichord part but also a violin part. There, there is no
distinction between 16a and 16b, and in the separate violon part there is no
need to write it out that way at all. Would I indeed follow that choice when
coding the violin part, I would end up with a difference in measure
numbering which is rather awkward during rehearsals. So, the first measure
of the second piece section should be 17 in both parts.
 
Luckily enough, in the users reference I found the possibility to manually
influence measure numbering (page 189 section 8.2.4) so to me the discussion
has lost its practical relevance. Lilypond's programmers may or may not take
one of the two views...
 
Paul de Bruin.

  _____  

Ik gebruik de gratis versie van SPAMfighter <http://www.spamfighter.com/lnl>

Wij zijn een gemeenschap van 6 miljoen gebruikers in strijd tegen spam.
214 spam-mails zijn er tot op heden geblokkeerd.
De Professionele versie heeft deze voetnoot niet.