On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 11:42 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
> Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > > > 2013/5/11 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > >> Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> 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. > >> > >> Not if there is a change in line/page breaking. > > > > Sure, but it's still about a thousand times more reliable than > > overriding control-points directly. > > Hardly. It's slightly more benign against different amonuts of > stretching/shrinking, "Slightly"? This strikes me as a bit of an exaggeration. > but when the slur positioning algorithm changes, > relative changes to control points will give unpredictable results. > As I said above, it is most useful when such layout details as line and page breaks are settled--as, of course, is directly overriding control points, -David
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
