Re: Patch: issue #659

[Neil Puttock]

2010/1/8 Marc Hohl <address@hidden>:

> Yes, the picture in the tracker has one loop missing, but in
> all other sources, the sign looked (mainly) as mine.

How do they deal with the segno at the end of a line though?  The
tracker example is aligned as a normal barline (i.e., with the
double-bar at the right edge), but this is going to be tricky to
achieve just for this case using BarLine grobs.

>>
>> Two general thoughts:
>>
>> 1) I think the internal double bar is a bit too heavy for the glyph,
>> though I can understand why you'd use the default to tie in with the
>> span-bar.
>>
>
> But how can this be solved? Should there be some kind of "segno double bar"
> with a smaller width?

It's not really ideal, but I can't think of anything better.

>>
>> 2) Should the sign scale for different line-counts?  Of course, this
>> would be much more complicated to implement, since you'd have to split
>> the glyph into several parts. :)
>>
>
> Phooey, I don't know if I am able to cope with this...
> Generally, I like this sign, because it sticks in the staff lines and
> therefore doesn't occupy space above the staff (in comparison
> to the normal segno mark), but it seems not to be
> used very often.

I agree it's not really worth the bother since it likely to be a niche
symbol; on the other hand, your current implementation represents a
departure from the default behaviour of all the existing barlines: all
of them scale properly (either using 'line-count/'line-positions or
'staff-space).

> I also had the idea to enhance the \repeat command, so one can code
> \repeat segno { ... } and lilypond inserts .S and S. instead of ||: and :||

This would be great, and a much better fit for the new segno.

> but I don't have a clue (yet) how to cope with the coda, because coda
> signs are not barlines, so I'll have to deal with \marks and stuff.

I don't think that would be too difficult, since it's no problem for
an engraver to create more than one type of grob.

Regards,
Neil