Hi Janek,
I'd be much happier with this change if you used a callback for 'gap
instead of inserting new code into the print function. That way it's
easy for users to override the default behaviour without adding more
properties.
Cheers,
Neil
http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/
On Jun 21, 2011, at 3:31 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> 2011/6/21 m...@apollinemike.com :
>> What I meant is that every time you use a magic number (i.e. 0.35),
>> consider making it user-tweakable unless you are absolutely sure
>> that there is no utility in changing that number.
>
> Ah, you meant t
2011/6/21 m...@apollinemike.com :
> What I meant is that every time you use a magic number (i.e. 0.35),
> consider making it user-tweakable unless you are absolutely sure
> that there is no utility in changing that number.
Ah, you meant this! :)
well, i think that 0.35 in (ly:grob-property grob 'g
- Original Message -
From: "Janek Warchoł"
Have you zoomed the output to check it? I suppose its a rasterization
problem; a lot of things seem to be wrong when output is watched
unzoomed on a computer screen (for example one stem in the attachment
looks two times thicker than the other,
On Jun 21, 2011, at 3:04 PM, lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm
> File scm/define-grobs.scm (right):
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode141
> scm/define-grobs.scm:141: (wo
Hi Karin,
i'm back from my short vacation.
2011/6/17 :
> the description explains clearly how to use the parameters gap and woot.
> So, it is a good starting point to understanding the scheme code that
> follows.
Good!
>> Yes, the quanting stays the same.
>
> I couldn't find the verb "to quant
2011/6/17 James Lowe :
> Hello
>
> What about 'glyph-space-distance-within-staff-affinity-thing'? cheek>
> Isn't that more in keeping with the new spacing terminology.
Huh? I don't understand. The <> tags don't match!
:P
___
lilypond-devel mailing l
http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm
File scm/define-grobs.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode141
scm/define-grobs.scm:141: (woot . 1)
On 2011/06/17 07:18:49, MikeSol wrote:
This seems like 1337 $p34k -
I ha
...@googlemail.com;
mts...@gmail.com; t.dani...@treda.co.uk; mikesubel...@otherinbox.com
Cc: re...@codereview.appspotmail.com; lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines (issue4609041)
Thanks for the ideas, Karin. They triggered another one for me.
C
Good work! A few comments below.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm
File scm/define-grobs.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/diff/12001/scm/define-grobs.scm#newcode141
scm/define-grobs.scm:141: (woot . 1)
This seems like 1337 $p34k - I have ne
On 6/16/11 4:53 PM, "karin.hoeth...@googlemail.com"
wrote:
> Hi Janek,
>
> the description explains clearly how to use the parameters gap and woot.
> So, it is a good starting point to understanding the scheme code that
> follows.
>
>> I added a parameter which controlls this, but no reasonable
Hi Janek,
the description explains clearly how to use the parameters gap and woot.
So, it is a good starting point to understanding the scheme code that
follows.
I added a parameter which controlls this, but no reasonable name for
it
(and for some intermediate stages in the code) comes to my
2011/6/13 Trevor Daniels :
Janek Warchoł wrote Monday, June 13, 2011 2:51 PM
2011/6/13 :
a) It would be better to honour the value of 'gap if this
is set by the user, rather than change a specifically
requested gap value.
My rationale is that it wouldn't make sense to set a big gap and
Janek Warchoł wrote Monday, June 13, 2011 2:51 PM
2011/6/13 :
a) It would be better to honour the value of 'gap if this
is set by the user, rather than change a specifically
requested gap value.
My rationale is that it wouldn't make sense to set a big gap and
really want to have it applie
2011/6/13 :
> Thanks - much clearer!
>
> Two points:
>
> a) It would be better to honour the value of 'gap if this
> is set by the user, rather than change a specifically
> requested gap value.
My rationale is that it wouldn't make sense to set a big gap and
really want to have it applied to all
Thanks - much clearer!
Two points:
a) It would be better to honour the value of 'gap if this
is set by the user, rather than change a specifically
requested gap value.
b) I don't understand why quanting is desired. An ambitus
doesn't align with anything. What is your reason?
http://coderevie
On 2011/06/13 08:01:22, Trevor Daniels wrote:
The interpersed comments make it very difficult to read
the code. Could you place an abridged summary at the top
instead?
Done.
I write a lot of comments so that rookies like me would be able to
understand the code in finite time, if they happen to
The interpersed comments make it very difficult to read
the code. Could you place an abridged summary at the top
instead?
http://codereview.appspot.com/4609041/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listi
Oops, i added wrong Mike...
Here is the code i used for testing; i attach a pdf compiled with my fix:
\new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } {
\override Staff.AmbitusLine #'gap = #0.45
c' f'
}
\new Staff \with { \consists Ambitus_engraver } {
\override Staff.AmbitusLine #'gap
Reviewers: Mike,
Description:
ambitus: special handling of small ambits' lines
Until now, it was not possible to have all ambits
look good: either the gaps between ambit line
and heads were too big for ambits of 4th and 5th,
or they were too small for other ambits.
This patch introduces automati
20 matches
Mail list logo
