> LilyPond does not use a hardcoded set of rules; rather, it tries to
> score different configurations, and pick the one with the best
> scores. This is a technique that works much better than hardcoding
> different rules, but in some cases there are small divergences with
> the 'prescribed' quants. We even have a regtest for it, see
> input/regression/beam-quant-standard.ly
>
> It might be possible to tune the scoring parameters to copy Ross
> exactly, but probably some other configurations will fall over.
I can imagine that after the scoring there's a second pass to
fine-tune the result, for example, to `snap' various parts of the beam
to the staff lines where possible.
Werner
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
