Am 15. Dezember 2014 11:05:59 MEZ, schrieb Johan Vromans <[email protected]>: >On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 10:18:21 +0100 >Knut Petersen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Shall we open a lilypond bug report? I don't know - the generated ps >code >> is valid and works, so there is no real bug. I think it would be a >> feature request. > >It's a bit of both. PostScript is much more optimized to deal with >normal >'show' than 'glyphshow', which is, or should be, used only in >exceptional >cases. So it would be beneficial to eliminate glyphshow as much as >possible. This can be obtained the way Ken describes. > >But instead of fixing this, I think it is much more interesting to >consider reworking the LP backend to directly produce PDF, and >eliminate >the ghostscript dependency. >
Two questions: 1) Is it clear that nobody would need Postscript output itself, e.g. to produce something different than PDF? 2) Is that a feasible goal? Urs >-- Johan > > >_______________________________________________ >lilypond-user mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
