lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: stacato


From: Mats Bengtsson
Subject: Re: stacato
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 21:51:37 +0200

> >>>>> "Mats" == Mats Bengtsson <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>     Mats> In older versions, it used to be that a bar check | also 
>     Mats> inserted a bar line in the output. Now it seems you have to
>     Mats> use both | and \bar "|". As far as I understand, the bar check
>     Mats> not only prints a warning if you are not on a bar line, but 
>     Mats> also resets the measurePosition, whereas the \bar command just
>     Mats> inserts a bar line but keeps counting the beats as if the extra
>     Mats> bar line didn't exist. 
> 
> Thanks, this is really useful information.  Is it in the documentation
> somewhere?  It explains why so much of my spacing went haywire when I
> put in the incipits, and what to do to fix it.

If you read the section on "Bar check", it says, among
others:

"Whenever a bar check is encountered during interpretation, a warning
message is issued if it doesn't fall at a measure boundary.  This can
help you find errors in the input.  Depending on the value of
barCheckNoSynchronize, the beginning of the measure will be
relocated, so this can also be used to shorten measures."


It's not clear to me, though if there's any advantage of the
current behaviour where a bar check does not imply a \bar 
command. I cannot really think of some situation where you
want to reset the start of the measure without adding a 
bar line, but probably there are some weird examples where
that's actually what you want. In most cases, though, it 
would save some typing to revert to the old behaviour where
you could insert a bar line by adding a |.

  /Mats



reply via email to

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