Well, how to improve the following situation?
~~~
{
\override Beam.after-line-breaking =
#(lambda (grob)
(format #t "\nbeam-positions:\n~y" (ly:grob-property grob 'positions))
(format #t "\nbeam-segments:\n~y" (ly:grob-property grob 'beam-segments)))
\stemUp
a64[
a
a
a16
\stemDown
c'''16
c'''64
c'''
c'''
c'''16
\stemUp
a16
a64
a
a
]
}
~~~
Lily warns "may not find good beam slope". The overrides only return some
info-values. Main-beam is the most left up beam-segment, the one with
(vertical-count . 0)
I'm at a loss even to imagine how it _should_ look.
---
** [issues:#5036] 128 beaming output not producing output as expected (?)**
**Status:** Accepted
**Created:** Fri Jan 20, 2017 01:43 PM UTC by Palmer Ralph
**Last Updated:** Sun Apr 23, 2017 01:42 PM UTC
**Owner:** nobody
Noeck wrote :
is this a bug or done on purpose? The following snippet produces beams
of which the lowest beam does not touch the staff line below.
~~~~
{ g128[ g] }
~~~~
The small-gaps-fill-with-ink theory should avoid this. IMHO the output
would look better like this:
~~~~
{
\override Beam.positions = #'(2.7 . 2.7)
g128[ g]
}
~~~~
What do the experts think?
This has been discussed at some length on the user list.
---
Sent from sourceforge.net because [email protected] is
subscribed to https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/
To unsubscribe from further messages, a project admin can change settings at
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/admin/issues/options. Or, if this is
a mailing list, you can unsubscribe from the mailing list.------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Testlilyissues-auto mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/testlilyissues-auto
