On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 09:39:23 -0700, <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2013/04/25 07:47:47, dak wrote: Which is mostly a problem of the previewers (_they_ are supposed to approximate the output of the PDF) but it still affects our users and we get the blame for it because "it works for others" (TM)
The "others" may well have assigned a junior programmer to keep trying things until things looked reasonable on his previewer. I would not think the beam shown at <http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/software> would escape complaints long enough to make it into a release, but it did. LilyPond is a volunteer project. We can do whatever maximizes the collective satisfaction of the participants.
But another problem is that of beams and stems not blending perfectly. We won't get rid of that before the release. It requires typesetting beams _along_ with their stems. It's not new, either.
The code tries to use parameters like 'blot-diameter' to fit the beam to the stem. I am not sure if the code allows for varying 'blot-diameter' all details (such as the joint between stem and note-head) but the attempt has been begun. Having the pretty-preview option increase 'blot-diameter' to the width of the thicker of the stem or single-bar-line, along with an ugly comment including a reminder to "synchronize with Stem.thickness", seems the simplest way to simplify the output for the sake of low-quality renderers, and to be easily reversible. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
