Re: thinking of submitting divisi snippet to LSR; comments?

[Shevek]

Phil Holmes-2 wrote:
> 
> The general aim of the LSR is not to be too prescriptive about what users 
> put there for other users to find and use.  However, to be useful in this 
> way, it works best if snippets are short and easily understood.  They
> should 
> really also compile error free.  From this perspective I would see
> problems 
> with your proposed snippet - I think it's trying to demonstrate too much
> in 
> a single snippet - I would be tempted to split it into 4 snippets, each 
> illustrating a single partcombine feature.  I would also work to get rid
> of 
> the errors, if necessary by creating tiny snippets for each and raising
> bug 
> reports.
> 
> Finally, I think refererencing other snippets is fine - I would flag this
> in 
> the comment
> 
> % This idea taken from LSR 123
> 
> or similar.
> 

So I was able to fix the majority of the errors by abusing \grace s8.
Unfortunately, that affects the spacing. The essence of the problem is this:

\version "2.14.2"

foo = \relative c' {
  \partcombineApart
  c4 d e2 |
  \tag #'fix \grace s8
  \partcombineSoloI
  c4 d e d |
}

baz = \relative c' {
  c4 b a b |
  R1 |
}

\partcombine \foo \baz
\partcombine \removeWithTag #'fix \foo \baz

There is another underlying weird behavior of partcombine, but I am still
working on a tiny example for it.
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/thinking-of-submitting-divisi-snippet-to-LSR--comments--tp34084271p34094203.html
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.