[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Do we really offer the future?
From: |
Richard Shann |
Subject: |
Re: Do we really offer the future? |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Apr 2015 14:01:48 +0100 |
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 08:31 -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> > Interesting, I didn't realize that this was a reason to use a front-end
> > to generate the LilyPond. With the Denemo front end it is Del,M to
> > delete a measure in all the staffs.
>
> Does that work even when the code is abstracted into one or more shared
> global variables, etc.?
> Or does Denemo not allow that flexibility of structure?
Denemo offers two or three sorts of LilyPond output, the most basic is a
monolithic file with the voices assigned to variable names and a score
layout section that arranges them in staffs. But for working with the
LilyPond output in a more flexible fashion there is an export of the
voices themselves to separate files. The user would then arrange for
these to be included into a suitably structured LilyPond file.
Richard
>
> Thanks,
> Kieren.
> ________________________________
>
> Kieren MacMillan, composer
> ‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
> ‣ email: address@hidden
>
- Re: Do we really offer the future?, (continued)
Re: Do we really offer the future?, Richard Shann, 2015/04/22
Re: Do we really offer the future?, Trevor Daniels, 2015/04/22
Re: Do we really offer the future?, Kieren MacMillan, 2015/04/22
- Re: Do we really offer the future?, Urs Liska, 2015/04/22
- Re: Do we really offer the future?, PMA, 2015/04/22
- Re: Do we really offer the future?, Kieren MacMillan, 2015/04/22
- Re: Do we really offer the future?, Simon Albrecht, 2015/04/22
- Re: Do we really offer the future?, Kieren MacMillan, 2015/04/22