2011/1/24 Werner LEMBERG :
>> Calling
>> perl scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl
>> from lilypond-git directory says
>> Can't exec @PERL@ at scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl line 1.
>> First line of that file reads
>> #!@PERL@
>>
>> Strange...
>
> Well, the perl script gets `massaged', and the @PERL@ construct g
>> By the way, how to call mf with changed output directory? I tried
>> mf '\mode:=proof; input feta-noteheads20'-output-directory=../build
>> and
>> mf '\mode:=proof; -output-directory="../build" input feta-noteheads20'
>> but both failed...
>
> It fails for me too... I've just reported this to
> Calling
> perl scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl
> from lilypond-git directory says
> Can't exec @PERL@ at scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl line 1.
> First line of that file reads
> #!@PERL@
>
> Strange...
Well, the perl script gets `massaged', and the @PERL@ construct gets
replaced with a real path to the
2011/1/24 Werner LEMBERG :
>
>> mf2pt1: command not found
>
> Ah, sorry, the script is in /scripts/build, so you should
> say
>
> perl /path/to/lilypond/src/directory/scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl ...
Calling
perl scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl
from lilypond-git directory says
Can't exec @PERL@ at scripts
> mf2pt1: command not found
Ah, sorry, the script is in /scripts/build, so you should
say
perl /path/to/lilypond/src/directory/scripts/build/mf2pt1.pl ...
> Or would it provide some important information?
Yes, what mf2pt1 produces shows the exact outlines of the font. This
is always good to
> By the way, how to call mf with changed output directory? I tried
> mf '\mode:=proof; input feta-noteheads20'-output-directory=../build
> and
> mf '\mode:=proof; -output-directory="../build" input feta-noteheads20'
> but both failed...
It fails for me too... I've just reported this to the TeXLi
2011/1/24 Werner LEMBERG :
>>> In one of my previous mails I gave you a recipe how to produce a
>>> `proof' version of the font using `mf' and `gftodvi'. It doesn't
>>> help to get the exact outline since it is always based on the
>>> rasterized output of `mf', but it nicely shows the construction
>> In one of my previous mails I gave you a recipe how to produce a
>> `proof' version of the font using `mf' and `gftodvi'. It doesn't
>> help to get the exact outline since it is always based on the
>> rasterized output of `mf', but it nicely shows the construction
>> points (if possible).
>
>
2011/1/23 Werner LEMBERG :
>
>> umm... DVI output? I've searched the manuals and didn't found how
>> to achieve it :/
>
> In one of my previous mails I gave you a recipe how to produce a
> `proof' version of the font using `mf' and `gftodvi'. It doesn't help
> to get the exact outline since it is
2011/1/23 Carl Sorensen :
>
> Well, you could call calc_length to get the stem length, since you have the
> stem grob in the form of me, i.e.
>
> Real length = robust_scm2double (me->calc_length (smob));
>
> If you want to, you could try adding a saved value for the length so you
> don't have to ma
> umm... DVI output? I've searched the manuals and didn't found how
> to achieve it :/
In one of my previous mails I gave you a recipe how to produce a
`proof' version of the font using `mf' and `gftodvi'. It doesn't help
to get the exact outline since it is always based on the rasterized
outpu
On 1/22/11 5:38 PM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> W dniu 22 stycznia 2011 19:06 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
> napisał:
>> On 1/22/11 10:59 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
>> wrote:
> Now i'm almost done. However i still don't know how to attach
> different versions of flags to the stems.
>>
>> Look in
> And there is one more thing - is it a bug in font sources? When i change
> total_depth# = 3.5 staff_space# - blot_diameter# / 2;
> to
> total_depth# = 3 staff_space# - blot_diameter# / 2;
> (in definition of u4 flag, line 163 of feta-flags.mf), i get the
> output in attachment. I've tried other v
On 1/22/11 10:59 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2011/1/22 Phil Holmes :
>> - Original Message - From: "Janek Warchoł"
>>
>>
>>> Now i'm almost done. However i still don't know how to attach
>>> different versions of flags to the stems.
>>
Look in lily/stem.cc. Method Stem::calc_flag
2011/1/22 Phil Holmes :
> - Original Message - From: "Janek Warchoł"
>
>
>> Now i'm almost done. However i still don't know how to attach
>> different versions of flags to the stems.
>
>> cheers,
>> Janek
>
> Is this too simple for what you're discussing?
>
> http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/It
- Original Message -
From: "Janek Warchoł"
Now i'm almost done. However i still don't know how to attach
different versions of flags to the stems.
cheers,
Janek
Is this too simple for what you're discussing?
http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=678
--
Phil Holmes
__
> On 1/22/11 1:37 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
> wrote:
>> it seems that no matter what i do inside the metafont files in mf
>> directory, the changes to the font are not made
W dniu 22 stycznia 2011 15:42 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
napisał:
> I do
> rm mf/out/*
> make
> when I want to rebuild fonts.
2011
On 1/22/11 1:37 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after fixing my problems with virtualBox (again...) i'm trying to
> implement the changes i suggested long ago and test them.
> Unfortunately i have 2 problems:
> - it seems that no matter what i do inside the metafont files in mf
> directory,
Am 22.01.2011 10:07, schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
- it seems that no matter what i do inside the metafont files in mf
directory, the changes to the font are not made (i.e. after running
make all from /build, and compiling a file with binary found in
build/out/bin/, the pdf output remains the same)
Pe
> - it seems that no matter what i do inside the metafont files in mf
> directory, the changes to the font are not made (i.e. after running
> make all from /build, and compiling a file with binary found in
> build/out/bin/, the pdf output remains the same)
Perhaps there are missing dependencies i
Hi,
after fixing my problems with virtualBox (again...) i'm trying to
implement the changes i suggested long ago and test them.
Unfortunately i have 2 problems:
- it seems that no matter what i do inside the metafont files in mf
directory, the changes to the font are not made (i.e. after running
m
2010/12/31 Carl Sorensen :
>
> On 12/29/10 4:32 PM, "Janek Warchoł"
> wrote:
>> I prefer B because it is the most balanced one - the 16ths don't look
>> cramped, and the 8ths don't look 'airy' when compared to 16ths
>> (especially the beamed variant. I think that beamed and flagged stems
>> of the
2010/12/31 Carl Sorensen :
>
> I think I agree, but this rule does not agree with the engraving books. So
> if we go this way we're breaking new ground. That makes me nervous. I
> certainly wouldn't want to do this without get agreement from a larger
> number of the core developers.
Hi!
Sorry
On 12/29/10 4:32 PM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2010/12/29 Carl Sorensen :
>> In such a case, there are different standards, we apply both, with a
>> variable to choose between the different behaviors. That's why we have
>> different accidental behaviors.
>
> And that's very good indeed! But s
On 12/29/10 1:23 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2010/12/28 Carl Sorensen
>>
>> On 12/28/10 12:28 PM, "Janek Warchoł"
>> wrote:
>>
>
> Maybe. But from what i've heard, there are few things that actually
> can be called standards. I heards that engraving books don't agree
> with each other qu
On 12/28/10 12:28 PM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2010/12/27 Han-Wen Nienhuys
>> Why don't you try to find some scans of reputable editions to see what
>> the standard behavior is in this case?
>
> Because i believe the situation is quite different.
> Would it be feasible for an engraver to have d
2010/12/27 Han-Wen Nienhuys
> Why don't you try to find some scans of reputable editions to see what
> the standard behavior is in this case?
Because i believe the situation is quite different.
Would it be feasible for an engraver to have different flags for many
different stem lengths? No, perha
2010/12/27 Janek Warchoł :
>> No, that is not my answer. I don't have an answer yet. But my current
>> thought (without yet reviewing my engraving books) is "lengthen the stem".
>> That is, I (tentatively) reject the idea that there is such thing as a
>> smaller-than-regular-stem whose length is
2010/12/27 Carl Sorensen :
> On 12/27/10 9:01 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
> wrote:
>> i understand that your answer to this particular question is "compress
>> the flag" in case of downstem notes :)
>
> No, that is not my answer. I don't have an answer yet. But my current
> thought (without yet reviewin
On 12/27/10 9:01 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2010/12/27 Carl Sorensen :
>
>>> Thanks for your answer :)
>>> And please say what do you think about scaling those flags.
>>
>> So far, I don't know. I want to see what the reference books have to say (I
>> have copies of Stone, Ross, and Read in
2010/12/27 Carl Sorensen :
> On 12/27/10 7:38 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
> wrote:
>> That's exactly what i expect! I'll try to solve it, as hard as i can.
>> (The only thing that worries me is that my programming skills are not
>> high... i only hope that i picked an issue that is not very difficult
>> t
On 12/27/10 7:38 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2010/12/27 Carl Sorensen :
>> Janek,
>>
>> I appreciate your work. And I appreciate your raising the issue.
>> (...) [But]
>> The *only* way for you to guarantee it is solved is for *you* to do the work.
>
> That's exactly what i expect! I'll try t
2010/12/27 Carl Sorensen :
> Janek,
>
> I appreciate your work. And I appreciate your raising the issue.
> (...) [But]
> The *only* way for you to guarantee it is solved is for *you* to do the work.
That's exactly what i expect! I'll try to solve it, as hard as i can.
(The only thing that worries
2010/12/27 James Lowe :
>
> 2010/12/27 Janek Warchoł :
> > "the same kind of discussion" - do you mean that it's bad idea to
> > touch this issue because it will lead to pointless academical
> > disputes?
>
> No not at all, I was merely point out that this had already been discussed so
> that you
On 12/27/10 6:53 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> W dniu 27 grudnia 2010 14:02 użytkownik James Lowe
> napisał:
>>
>>> 2010/12/27 Janek Warchoł :
>>> - in the first line: the stems of the b's are too short,
>>
>> Janek,
>>
>> See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-04/msg00085.h
Janek,
From: Janek Warchoł [lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com]
Sent: 27 December 2010 13:53
To: James Lowe
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: flags, beams and stem length in forced directions - output
improvement
W dniu 27 grudnia 2010 14:02 użytkownik James
W dniu 27 grudnia 2010 14:02 użytkownik James Lowe
napisał:
>
> > 2010/12/27 Janek Warchoł :
> > - in the first line: the stems of the b's are too short,
>
> Janek,
>
> See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-04/msg00085.html
>
> I believe this is the same kind of discussion for
, beams and stem length in forced directions - output improvement
Hi all,
There is a problem with LilyPond default output that i want to
discuss. Look at the attachment1:
- in the first line: the stems of the b's are too short,
---
See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/20
38 matches
Mail list logo
