Reviewers: thomasmorley651,

Message:
On 2018/02/21 22:44:42, thomasmorley651 wrote:
I suggest to update regtests ‘markup-rest.ly’ and
‘markup-rest-styles.ly’ as
well.
If no glyph for a certain style is found the default is taken anyway,
but it
would be nice if the new glyphs would be demonstrated via markup as
well.

Do we really need that triple occurence? OTOH, could you suggest where
to regtest the flags?

Also, it deserves an entry in changes, imho.

Agreed. There is at least one other patch I made that needs a Changes
entry (issue 5247, maybe 5249, maybe 3208 after 5258 is fixed too) but
at the moment I’m not able to make doc for testing (see list).

Description:
add glyphs for 256th, 512th and 1024th flags and rests

This post on lilypond-user asks for small rhythmic values (though it
doesn’t explicitely mention rests and unbeamed/flagged notes):
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2018-02/msg00614.html

1024th is the shortest duration suggested by SMuFL.

Needs special focus in review:
• forms of downstem flags

Needs improvement but I don’t know how to do:
• dot position for very short rests (see regtest)

Contains also:
• adjust stem lengths for 256th, 512th, and 1024th flags
• Notation Reference: change shortest value from 128th to 1024th
• add very short rests to regtest

Please review this at https://codereview.appspot.com/336590043/

Affected files (+650, -135 lines):
  M Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely
  M input/regression/rest.ly
  M mf/feta-flags.mf
  M mf/feta-rests.mf
  M ps/encodingdefs.ps
  M scm/define-grobs.scm


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Reply via email to