Am Fr., 27. März 2020 um 14:51 Uhr schrieb Torsten Hämmerle
:
>
> Thomas Morley-2 wrote
> > I have no clue why this happens and where those added values came from.
> >
> > Any insights?
>
>
> Hi Harm,
>
>
> Believe it or not, this strange (and certainly unintended) effect is caused
> by the
Thomas Morley-2 wrote
> I have no clue why this happens and where those added values came from.
>
> Any insights?
Hi Harm,
Believe it or not, this strange (and certainly unintended) effect is caused
by the thickness of the invisible stems!
The beam shortening will actually depend on the beam
Am Fr., 27. März 2020 um 13:48 Uhr schrieb Malte Meyn :
>
>
>
> Am 27.03.20 um 12:23 schrieb Thomas Morley:
> > I have no clue why this happens and where those added values came from.
> >
> > Any insights?
>
> Wild guess, to be tested: ll. 558 ff. of beam.cc.
>
Hi Malte,
I had a look, alas, with
Am 27.03.20 um 12:23 schrieb Thomas Morley:
I have no clue why this happens and where those added values came from.
Any insights?
Wild guess, to be tested: ll. 558 ff. of beam.cc.
Hi all,
I tried to improve the code from
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2020-03/msg00265.html
but all my attempts resulted in inconsistent behaviour.
Thus I wrote some test-code, see bottom.
Obviously the beam is shortened while applying 'gap, though as soon as
'gap exceeds
