Add end-start repeat barline back to barlines- and repeats palettes

• Feb 9, 2019 - 12:43
Reported version
3.0
Type
Functional
Frequency
Many
Severity
S5 - Suggestion
Reproducibility
Always
Status
fixed
Regression
Yes
Workaround
Yes
Project

The lack of the end/start repeat barline in MuseScore 3 leads to questions ion the formume time and time again. And even if it was sort of a fake back in MuseScore 2, it was still usefull at times.

Workaround is to add end repeat barline to measure n and start repeat barlinwe to measure n+1


Comments

For the record, it was removed because it is not and never has been a single symbol - it has always been an end repeat in one measure and a start repeat in the next, back-to-back. They just appear like one symbol when the measures happen to be adjacent on the same system, but it becomes obvious it really is two different symbols if the first measure is at the end of one line and the second is on the next. The old "fake" back-to-back symbol in the palette was never anything more than a shortcut for adding the two symbols individually. Which isn't to say we could never consider adding that fake symbol shortcut back. But it is important people realize, adding the symbols individually is not a "workaround", it's all the old "fake" symbol did anyhow, and all it would continue to do if we did add it again.

This has been explained on the forum many times, but it deserved repeating (sorry :-)) here, if for no reason other than to have a single place where this is explained when we refer people here while we decide if/when to add it back.

There's only one commit that mentions END_START_BARLINE, 8ec9a6cd, so back then (March 8, 2017) it still existed.
It got removed with d435c3e5fcae, so still existed with the previous commit, 1167ae6, both on March 20, 2017.

I guess this could get used to reinstate the code for it, looking into it now

Thanks for help! Unfortunately this workaround doesn't work if the repeat sign is located in the middle of the measure. I'm going back to Musescore 2, so I can finish my score.

??? It's not a workaround, it's the real solution. Did you try it? Works perfectly, this is exactly what the old "fake" symbol always did anyhow. Should be no different whatsoever.

Thanks for answering quickly. It was only a reply for the topic from feb 9 "Workaround is to add end repeat barline to measure n and start repeat barlinwe to measure n+1".
Unfortunately I'm not able to apply fix #283828. I've no idea, how to do this. Sorry I'm only an enduser.
Regards, Alex

Repeat barlines only work (playback) on measure boundaries, so if you want them mid-measure, you need to split the measure first, plain and simple.
And completely unrelated to the issue at hand here, the lack of an end/start repeat barline.

Again, it is not and never has been a single symbol. It's an end repeat in one bar and a start in the next. So, that is what you add. Once you split a bar it is in every sense two separate bars. So add an end repeat in one, and a start in the other. If the bars happen to be adjacent on the same system, the repeats will appear to merge into a single symbol just as you would expect.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

I have to say removal of the begin-end repeat as a facility - convenient or otherwise - is a negative step. It belies wrong thinking in my opinion. Music notation has been established over the centuries and often has many equivalent ways of expressing the same thing. It should be the prime object of a typesetting program to facilitate as much of established notation as it can. The program should not be dictating which aspects of notation it wants to provide and therefore force equivalents into obsolescence. Programming convenience is no justification for the end user. Many of us who typeset music try to be faithful to a composer's use of notation, partly because it provides a sense of authenticity and partly because notation is not always precise. Any such ambiguities need to be preserved for the performance to rule on. This goes way beyond the end-start repeat: the venerable block notation for multi-bar rests is another; alternate clef styles another. But even "automatic placement" is a negative step if one cannot elect turn it off globally. This is all about trying to force uniformity on the end user according musecore. You'll lose your supporters if you persist with this approach. I think I've had about as much fun as I can stand from musecore 3. I shall return to 2.1

Getting end/start repeat back is what thie issue is about and there's even a PR pending (but not fully functional), for every other concern you have open a new topicor discuss it on an existing one ( (like the block-style multimesure rests, see #44846: old style multimeasure rests and the automatic placement, see #278999: Need option to completely disable Auto Placement), this just doesn't belong here.
An don't return to MuseScore 2.1, ever. If anything, go to MuseScore 2.3.2.

And once more to be clear: of course this is a valid style of notation! We recognize this, which is why we never stopped supporting it. We simply changed the method of creating this notation to better reflect what it actually means. It does indeed take one extra (double)-click to create this currently, but there is a pending change to reinstate the old shortcut icon (which always did exactly this same thing - it inserted the two separate symbols for you) as well. So, we ask that people please be patient, realize you can still do exactly what you could do before with just one extra step, and hopefully the change to reinstate the old shortcut icon will become part of the next update!

And I need help with that PR...
1. the end-start repeat barline looks bad in the palettes
2. applying it we endup with an end-start- and a start-repeat barline on top of one another

Actually, it depends on the order of operations, it works to select the barline, then double-click the start repeat, then double-click the end without first reselecting the barline. Also, it's additive if you select the measure rather than the barline, but of course you need to select (or drag to) the measures separately. Anyhow, OK, depending on how you do it, maybe it's two clicks. Still, it's a second or two of time. It still feels some people are not understanding that this is still supported and is still dead simple, and it produces exactly the right results. I'm in favor of seeing the icon added back just so we don't have to keep having this conversation, but it's also important people do understand that this is not the enormous regression it may appear to be at first sight.

Fix version
3.1.0