[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: priority problem \fermataMarkup vs. text markup

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: priority problem \fermataMarkup vs. text markup
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 06:06:40 -0600

On 9/2/09 2:41 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Werner LEMBERG wrote Tuesday, September 01, 2009 4:30 PM
>>> It seems sensible to have a distinct, lower, value, but something
>>> like 40 would place it below everything else while retaining some
>>> future flexibility.
>> OK.  Shall I commit this or will you do that?
> Werner, I'll do it, but I've had second
> thoughts.  If we make this change it will
> give all multi-measure rest text priority
> over script text, which may not be desirable.
> Priority should be given only to fermata.
> Text script and multi-measure rest text other
> than fermata should continue to be prioritised
> according to which comes first, as now.

I think that you're right in your concern.

> So instead I propose to change the definition
> of \fermataMarkup to:
> fermataMarkup =
> #(make-music 'MultiMeasureTextEvent
>    'tweaks (list
>              ; Set the 'text based on the 'direction
>              (cons 'text (lambda (grob)
>                (if (eq? (ly:grob-property grob 'direction) DOWN)
>                  (markup #:musicglyph "scripts.dfermata")
>                  (markup #:musicglyph "scripts.ufermata"))))
>              (cons 'outside-staff-priority 40)))
> This works, but I'm not sure if I've got
> the Scheme indentation right.

The Scheme indentation looks fine to me.

> Carl, as my first frogs task could you please
> check this out before I commit?

This looks good to me, but before I would approve it I would want to see a
regtest and the output of the regtest.  Have you made a test and run it?



reply via email to

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