On 2012/09/14 06:53:47, Keith wrote:
On 2012/09/14 06:16:57, benko.pal wrote: > main argument: I can't guess why the user chose a > specific way of manipulating the staff and how (s)he > interprets it,
If the user writes > \override #'staff-space = #0.5 he wants to scale things.
If he writes > \override #'line-positions = #'(-2 -1 0 1 2) he wants to re-arrange things
perhaps yes, perhaps not (using different weird microtonal thingies). in this comparison the relevant thing is whether he wants different repeat signs. note that, unfortunately, LilyPond has several scaling possibilities, enabling the user to scale some and not other things. if everything (dots included) is scaled, the code under review will do the right thing; if some is not, then divining the intent is not so easy. to me the repeat sign is a purely engraving matter. making it depend on the musical meaning of the staff is just making it more fragile. if we want repeat signs in a TabStaff look as requested, then I want every repeat sign (with identical dot size) in an identically looking staff (regardless how it's achieved by mixing line-positions, set-global-staff-size, layout-set-staff-size, line-count, staff-space) look identical. http://codereview.appspot.com/6506090/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
