2008/12/7 Maximilian Albert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi Neil, > > thanks a lot for your further very helpful ideas. Attached is a patch > for a new approach which implements your suggestion to define a new > property. It's called 'shifted-towards-stem and can take any real > value, where 0.0 means to keep the default position (centered on the > note-head) and 1.0 means centered on the stem (intermediate values are > of course possible). I also added a check whether the grob in question > actually possesses a stem, so it works well for skips, too (perhaps > there is a more Lilypond-ish way of doing things but as far as I could > test, it works).
This seems to work fine. :)
I've run regtests with and without a default for staccati, and both
compile without any problems (see the attached image for the expected
change in staccato-pos.ly when 'shifted-towards-stem is set to 0.5 in
script.scm).
+ (shifted-towards-stem ,number? "Amount by which scripts are shifted
Since LilyPond uses American English for docs/properties,
shifted-toward-stem is probably better.
+ (let* ((shift (ly:grob-property grob 'shifted-towards-stem))
If you set a default value here, then you won't have to check whether
it's null later:
(let* ((shift (ly:grob-property grob 'shifted-towards-stem 0.0))
> Since Reinhold said it would be best to make the shifting optional and
> off by default, I didn't set any properties in script.scm. But the
> shifting can of course be overridden in the .ly file itself (see
> attached example). My only question is, how can I set the property for
> individual script types instead of all scripts at once, i.e. what
> would I need to write instead of
>
> \override Script #'shifted-towards-stem = #'1.0
>
> if I wanted to enable shifting only for staccato marks, say?
Something like this should do it:
#(define ((shift-articulation type amount) grob)
(let ((artic (ly:event-property
(ly:grob-property grob 'cause)
'articulation-type)))
(if (equal? type artic)
amount
0)))
\override Script #'shifted-towards-stem = #(shift-articulation "staccato" 1)
> P.S.: In case this gets approved in one form or the other, what would
> be necessary to document it properly? Add a LSR example, a regression
> test, something else? Anything I need to keep in mind when writing
> these?
A regression test and documentation using an LSR snippet should
suffice (as a new feature, it would go in input/new rather than LSR
directly).
Regards,
Neil
<<attachment: lily-fe894752.compare.jpeg>>
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
