David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: > I have to disagree with your assessment: the behavior of 12.3 made sense > under the constraints the code worked with. It was a result of its > design decisions. The result of 13.35 does not make sense. As you can > easily see by removing the markup, it is not a result of a generally > wider spacing decision. > > If you think different, how about the following:
[...] It is particularly educational to look at the distances used in the last page. They don't particularly look like the general spacing is intended to be on the loose side. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
