[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lilypond-bug
Subject:    Re: Bug with alternativeRestores
From:       "James Lowe" <james.lowe () runbox ! com>
Date:       2018-04-27 10:48:30
Message-ID: E1fC0vX-0007Sx-3N () rmmprod06 ! runbox
[Download RAW message or body]

Hello,

I've created

https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5315

To track this issue.

Thank you.

James




On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 22:19:05 +0100 (BST), "James Lowe" <pkx166h@runbox.com> wrote:

> Hello Steven
> 
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 19:33:34 +0000, Steven Weber <panteck@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > No, that is the problem.  If you look at the file, you'll see in the first \
> > example, I switch the time from 2/2 to 3/4 in the first alternative, and then \
> > Lilypond automatically returns the second alternative to 2/2 time.  However, when \
> > I do the metadata/notes in separate variables, the automatic switch from 3/4 back \
> > to 2/2 does not occur (and hence, you get all the barcheck errors). 
> > --Steven
> > 
> > On 4/23/18, 11:59 AM, "James Lowe" <pkx166h@runbox.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 19:53:05 +0000, Steven Weber <panteck@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > AlternativeRestores seem to work fine as long as your metadata & notes are in \
> > > the same block.  If you separate them into a metadata variable and a notes \
> > > variable, the second alternative is always in the same time signature as the \
> > > first alternative. 
> > > This is against lilypond 2.19.81 on Windows.
> > > 
> > > --Steven
> > 
> > Your example is giving me barcheck errors for those entries using the \skip \
> > values. 
> > Is this just a problem with your example?
> > 
> > James
> > 
> > 
> 
> We also had this reported by another user last year - something was nagging me at \
> the back of my brain that I'd seen this recently, and so I dug back through the bug \
> list emails and found it: 
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2017-09/msg00022.html
> 
> (not so recent I guess)
> 
> and I didn't see any reply/confirmation of this being a bug by those that know \
> about development. 
> The workaround from the other user is to explicitly put the time signature directly \
> in the alternate's construct . 
> e.g
> 
> metadata =
> {
> 	\time 2/2
> 	\clef bass
> 
> 	\repeat volta 2 { \skip 1*2/2*1 | }
> 	\alternative
> 	{
> 		{ \time 3/4 \skip 1*3/4*1 | }
> 		{ \time 2/2 \skip 1*2/2*1 | } % <---- add the \time 2/2 here
> 	}
> 	\skip 1*2/2*1 |
> }
> 
> notes = 
> {
> 	\repeat volta 2 { c2 e | }
> 	\alternative
> 	{
> 		{ f4 e d | }
> 		{ \time 2/2 f2 d | } % <---- add the \time 2/2 here
> 	}
> 	g1 |
> }
> 
> Then it compiles (without bar check warnings) OK as far as I can tell.
> 
> I think that LilyPond is just not able to cope with the ambiguity of the mix of \
> time signatures in the alternate repeats when you use a << >> construct.  
> So the issue is (again I think I am not qualified to say for certain) not with the \
> alternate restores but the simultaneous construct but I don't think this is a bug \
> but a feature. 
> Maybe others in the dev team can comment and perhaps we can add something to the \
> doc (if it is not a bug) as a 'Known issue'. 
> Regards
> 
> James



_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]