[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: music function to be included somewhere in scm/*

From: tisimst
Subject: Re: music function to be included somewhere in scm/*
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 09:05:07 -0700 (MST)

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:22 AM, Alexander Kobel-2 [via Lilypond] <
address@hidden> wrote:

> On 2016-12-20 17:21, Abraham Lee wrote:
> > Yes, thanks for making this possible! It will be a great addition.
> Thanks Abraham.
> > One question I have about having the two properties is how will the two
> be
> > reconciled in actual use? In other words, if collapse-length is larger
> than
> > forced-length, will there still be the same amount of space between
> > syllables even without the extender (to the amount of forced-length)?
> One thing remains identical to the current situation: Extenders never
> ever influence horizontal spacing.
> > Maybe the question I really have is this: what does "given this length
> _if
> > possible_" mean and what governs this possibility? I can totally
> understand
> > how they work individually, I'm just trying to understand how I can use
> > them well together since it seems that forced-length contradicts
> > collapse-length.
> You won't really use them together; at least, not both will be effective
> at the same time:
> (1) If the natural length (essentially: the distance from the right end
> of the syllable to the right end of the last note in the corresponding
> melisma) is less than collapse-length, this extender will not be printed.
> (2) If you /force/ an extender, that is, you explicitly add one for a
> syllable that does not belong to a melisma, there is no "natural length"
> - simply because there is no "natural extender". The "faked" length of
> such an extender will be given by the minimum of forced-length and the
> available space to the next syllable. Again, this will not affect the
> space between the notes.
> Forced extenders should only be necessary under extraordinary
> circumstances, such as an extender reaching into a alternative ending of
> a repeat, re-extending after rests, or even more obscure design studies.

Ah! I understand now. Thank you for explaining that. So, it's "Force an
extender to appear if there is sufficient space (i.e., at least as much as
"collapse-length"), even in places they wouldn't normally be used." Is that
right? If so, then I think "forced-length" is not the right name for it.
Perhaps just "force" or "force-all"? Or is forced appearance not subject to


View this message in context:
Sent from the Dev mailing list archive at

reply via email to

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