http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/42001/lily/note-head.cc File lily/note-head.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/42001/lily/note-head.cc#newcode49 lily/note-head.cc:49: } Yuck. The decision tree is complex enough that two tests of font capability seem to be required for the most common case; that will be slow on Windows if the tests require font-lookups. Caching would help, but if it complicates the code then future changes will be harder. Best would be to use the same method as shape-notes, where the engraver determines the part of glyph name that depends on pitch. Alternatively, use a property of NoteHead, along-side of 'style', to indicate if a reduced-hole version is expected in the font, and look for the glyph only when property says to expect it. http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/42001/lily/stem.cc File lily/stem.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/42001/lily/stem.cc#newcode853 lily/stem.cc:853: extract_grob_set (me, "note-heads", heads); 'f' already points to the first head; why not just use that? http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/diff/42001/lily/stem.cc#newcode855 lily/stem.cc:855: if (attach && !scm_is_eq (style, ly_symbol2scm ("mensural")) To adjust the attach points, shouldn't you adjust charwx in the font? http://codereview.appspot.com/4639065/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
