[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH] Doc: LM: Reformat ly code.

From: Trevor Daniels
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Doc: LM: Reformat ly code.
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 19:17:29 +0100

I'd be happy with this too.


----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Polesky" <address@hidden> To: "Carl Sorensen" <address@hidden>; "lilypond-devel" <address@hidden>; "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> Cc: "Graham Percival" <address@hidden>; "James Lowe" <address@hidden>
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Doc: LM: Reformat ly code.

Trevor Daniels wrote:
A brief description of bar checks in 1.2.2 Working on
input files would be good.  I think bar checks are at
least as important as a \version statement, which is
mentioned there.

I think a better place would be in a new @subsection at the
top of 2.1 "Single staff notation", just before 2.1.1
"Accidentals and key signatures".  Here's my proposed text:

* * * * * * * * * *

@node Bar checks
@subsection Bar checks

Though not strictly necessary, @emph{bar checks} should be
used in the input code to show where bar lines are expected
to fall.  They are entered using the bar symbol, @code{|}.
With bar checks, the program can verify that you've entered
durations that make each measure add up to the correct
length.  Bar checks also make your input code easier to
read, since they help to keep things organized.

g1 | e1 | c2. c'4 | g4 c g e | c4 r r2 |
@end lilypond

Notation Reference:
@ruser{Bar and bar number checks}.

* * * * * * * * * *

- Mark

reply via email to

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