lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Modern-acc. bug when partial bar first


From: Donald Axel
Subject: Modern-acc. bug when partial bar first
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:34:51 +0200


   Hi Marco, You are right!

   After reading through the thread again I think you have discovered
a bug. If the partial bar has a natural C then the "modern" rules are
ignored - no natural sign appears in the attached examples. The partial
bar natural C should not influence the application of the natural-sign
rule in the next full bar.

   There is no rule which says that the first full bar should not have
an explicit cancelling in the other octave if the first bar has the same
natural note.

   (Same applies to modern-cautionary which works differently
from the documentation when there is a partial bar first.)

   Using the documentation example:

% ****************************************************************
% ly snippet contents follows:
% ****************************************************************
#(set-accidental-style 'modern-cautionary)
cis' c'' cis'2 | c'' c'


   Adding natural C as partial first bar changes the subsequent bar:

% ****************************************************************
% ly snippet contents follows:
% ****************************************************************
#(set-accidental-style 'modern) % applies to modern-cautionary (too).
\partial 4
         c''   |
cis' c'' cis'2 | c'' c'


   



On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:08:56 +0200
Marco Gusy <address@hidden> wrote:

> >    I think your example on how weird accidental rules seem in
> > some places is very good. Accidentals may seem odd even if it is the
> > correct way these accidentals are placed.
> >
> >    I do not think that the developers should change
> > the accidental-rules.
> 
> I don't understand what you mean, you say accidental rules seem weird in some 
> places, but should remain as they are. Why?

Even if the "modern" ruleset of the 20th century print is correctly
implemented there will be places where you must add or improve
readability based on previous lines or pages of print. Remember we are
still in the stone-age of programming and human-like rules are
very complicated to implement.


Regards/Donald Axel



Attachment: docu-acc-modern.png
Description: PNG image

Attachment: docu-acc-modern-pre4.png
Description: PNG image


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]