On Tuesday 21 November 2006 16:31, Joe Neeman wrote: > On 11/21/06, Erik Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > My main concern with pure max-slope is that it may not produce good > > results > > near tower-roofs. E.g., max-slope = 2 means that (min horizontal > > distance) is > > 0.5 * (min vertical distance) near rooftops; we may want to tune that 0.5 > > constant without affecting the max-slope. > > Would it be enough just to extend the flat part of the roof horizontally? > The maximum Euclidean distance between (extended flat line + slope) and > (flat line + circular corners + slope) is not really so big. Even when > max-slope = \infty, it's only the square root of the radius of the curve.
Ah, this will result in a hexagonal approximation of the circle if you set the flat-roof-extension length to something like (1-1/max-slope) * min-distance-between-skylines / 2. Nice! Sounds like a sufficient solution to me. Also, if there will be a real need for better approximations of the circle, we can always change that later. -- Erik _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
