Hi, 2013/5/10 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: >> I'm wondering whether we should advertise \shape more. It's >> tremendously helpful, and yet despite it had been added ~1 year ago >> (IIRC) many users don't know about it. > > I'm somewhat dubious about "tremendously helpful" as it defeats > automated typesetting.
I'm 100% for automated typesetting: it's my dream and the very reason why i'm using LilyPond. However, my experience (particularly with Fried project) shows that with regard to slurs and ties, LilyPond is very far from automated typesetting. If you want publication quality, you _have_ to tweak the output quite heavily - would you rather do this via setting control-points directly? Actually, \shape is quite close to the spirit of automated engraving, because if the layout changes slightly, \shape modifications usually "adapt" and still produce good results. Even with \shape, correcting ties and slurs is still the most time-consuming task in preparing the Fried material for publication. Quite frankly, if we didn't have \shape, i'd say that LilyPond was incapable of handling Fried project :( > And "had been added ~1 year ago" is a short time. Well, to look from a different perspective: if there were any pieces i had engraved without using \shape (since it was added to LilyPond), they most probably didn't contain any slurs at all. best, Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
