On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 19:58:41 -0700, <[email protected]> wrote:
I am afraid that you are trying to evaluate my proposal by tweaking existing knobs. The existing knobs are no use for a reasonable automatic resolution of the problem.
Yep, that is what I concluded; but I was not evaluating any proposal, just trying to mitigate what is listed as a critical issue. When knob-tweakers are available, tweaking knobs can be an effective way to discover what issues the machine we have can already overcome. This might be a "going to Abilene" situation, where each person would recommend this be a low-urgency project, but each erroneously assumes that it is high-urgency somebody else. Has anybody seen interleaving in real music? (I have not in Lilypond, but have seen it in published piano music.) I often struggle to coax Lilypond to put things closer together, whereas moving them apart is easy (padding, minimum-Y-extent, etc.) and well-documented because there are cases where Lilypond doesn't yet understand that more space is needed for us humans, or where Lilypond goofs and allows collisions. So I think Lilypond is perfectly useful despite issue 1290. Was the priority setting due to a misunderstanding? -Keith _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
