On 2016/12/30 16:59:55, Dan Eble wrote:
On 2016/12/29 17:47:46, david.nalesnik wrote: > Please review. Thanks!
I haven't reviewed the code, but the description makes me wonder, is
the current
behavior not a bug? Gould says "In tradition engraving," which
appears to be
her term for the style using church rests, "a rest bar takes the space
the
graphic symbol needs ..." (Behind Bars, p.565). Although she goes on
to
recommend against "tradition engraving," it seems that the bars should
be sized
to the rests, not the other way around.
Setting a default value for the property church-rest-inner-padding in scm/define-grobs.scm would make rest sizes consistent. Perhaps it would be better to add an additional property, something like "church-rest-size-to-measure," (default = #f) to turn the behavior on and off?
Is it important to preserve the old algorithm at all? If not, call it
a bug and
throw it out. If it is important to preserve, could it be handled
with a
conversion rule so that your new algorithm can be the default?
I figured it would be best to keep the old behavior around. I've never read a complaint before Jan-Peter's, and Gould says nothing about the layout of the rest itself that I see (other than that the width of the symbols relative to a whole rest). Would a conversion rule safely handle adding an override? https://codereview.appspot.com/319910043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel