2011/2/24 Janek Warchoł :
> See differences in output between original patch (variant 1):
> http://www.sendspace.com/file/d8jk3o
> and new patch: http://www.sendspace.com/file/tgmlfc
> Proof-sheet source code in attachment.
Ooops, i forgot the attachment...
Here it comes.
While waiting for reviews
Hi,
2011/2/22 Janek Warchoł
>
> I'll cook appropriate function tomorrow.
> Thanks,
> Janek
I'm very sorry for the delay, i had some trouble with git.
I've uploaded new patch for review, it supports custom stem lengths
and staves with custom line count.
See differences in output between original
2011/2/21 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
> 2011/2/21 Janek Warchoł :
>> 2011/2/21 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
>>> Can you make your code be less hardcoded? I propose something like:
>>>
>>> factor = (1+abs(hp[dir])) / (2*staff_radius + 1)
>>> shorten *= min(factor, 1.0)
>>
>> What staff_radius is? I tried to find an
2011/2/21 Janek Warchoł :
> 2011/2/21 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
>> Can you make your code be less hardcoded? I propose something like:
>>
>> factor = (1+abs(hp[dir])) / (2*staff_radius + 1)
>> shorten *= min(factor, 1.0)
>
> What staff_radius is? I tried to find an explanation, but to no avail...
Look
2011/2/21 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
> Can you make your code be less hardcoded? I propose something like:
>
> factor = (1+abs(hp[dir])) / (2*staff_radius + 1)
> shorten *= min(factor, 1.0)
What staff_radius is? I tried to find an explanation, but to no avail...
> this way, it will work with other typ
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 11:08:05PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> 2011/2/20 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
>
> > This change is default over current lily, so let's put it in. I can't
>
> this change is an improvement over current lily
>
It took me a lng time see any difference between the two alterna
2011/2/20 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
> This change is default over current lily, so let's put it in. I can't
this change is an improvement over current lily
[time to go to bed, I guess]
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - han...@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
_
2011/2/13 Janek Warchoł :
> This is the first part of a series of changes to the stems and flags.
> The suggested change is small, but in my opinion important.
> Look at the attached "transition testing.pdf" - it illustrates the problem:
> the 'b' stem is definately too short (it should not end at
2011/2/20 Graham Percival
>
> On 2/13/11, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> >
> > This is the first part of a series of changes to the stems and flags.
> > The suggested change is small, but in my opinion important.
>
> Thanks you for creating such an excellent report on the matter. You
> took the time to
On 2/13/11, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>
> This is the first part of a series of changes to the stems and flags.
> The suggested change is small, but in my opinion important.
Thanks you for creating such an excellent report on the matter. You
took the time to create two alternative solutions, with pdf
> First one has the advantage of being very simple, while the second
> may be more smooth to the eye (but the difference isn't really that
> big).
I prefer the first solution but I don't cast my mind in stone :-)
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing
Hi,
This is the first part of a series of changes to the stems and flags.
The suggested change is small, but in my opinion important.
Look at the attached "transition testing.pdf" - it illustrates the problem:
the 'b' stem is definately too short (it should not end at the same level as
the stem of
12 matches
Mail list logo
