Graham Percival escreveu: > You said that it added 5% or 10% to the processing time, so it wasn't > worth having it on by default. That's fine; I'm not criticizing that > decision. But what if somebody _is_ willing to spend that extra > processing time to get great-looking music? Currently they need to comb > through the manual (and program reference, because I haven't documented > every case because I don't know them all!) to find all such options.
IIRC, in this case, it's not clear that the result is always better. > At the very least we should have a doc page with the "higher quality > output commands that are turned off by default" \override commands. Why > not also make a > \qualifyProcessing > > macro that sets it up for them as well? I think that adding such a section is a good idea. Let's wait with adding \qualityProcessing when that section is there, and there are so much commands that make this worthwhile. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen LilyPond Software Design -- Code for Music Notation http://www.lilypond-design.com _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
