[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Skipping reminder accidentals in q
From: |
James |
Subject: |
Re: Skipping reminder accidentals in q |
Date: |
Sun, 13 Jul 2014 15:08:25 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 |
On 13/07/14 11:49, David Kastrup wrote:
> Helge Kruse <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Am 13.07.2014 11:57, schrieb David Kastrup:
>>
>>> <fis a d fis>4<f! a d f!> <f a d f> q
>>> Well, just write the latter version.
>> Well. this means "don't use q when you have accidentals in a chord".
> Reminder or forced accidentals, it would appear.
>
>> My example has a fourth chord. Without it the latter version doesn't
>> have any q.
>>
>>> It appears I have
>>> mentioned this when entering issue 3593 as having _also_ been discussed,
>>> illustrating how important the bug squad is for not letting reports get
>>> dropped silently.
>>>
>> So is this considered as a bug? Since #3593 is closed it should be
>> recorded as a new bug?
> With q, it is more of an enhancement request. With
> Completion_heads_engraver, it is more of a bug than a limitation because
> you cannot really work around it.
>
> Both are separate requests concerning separate code.
>
I am just not really understanding what technically these are as the
thread talks about 'note splitting' and the like and this thread talks
about repeated chords/notes using 'q'.
So if you could give me some appropriate tracker titles, I can hunt down
the relevant threads and create the trackers more quickly.
Thanks
James
- Re: Skipping reminder accidentals in q,
James <=