Here is the current countdown list.
The next countdown will be on March 27.
A list of all merge requests can be found here:
https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests?sort=label_priority
Push:
!1258 Revise System::do_break_substitution_and_fixup_refpoints - Jean
Abou Samra
Le 25/03/2022 à 15:28, Lukas-Fabian Moser a écrit :
I don't see one either, but there appear to be scores in the wild that
use them (I saw an example on the user list, which is what triggered
the original post). The question is whether we consider it fine to
start giving an error on them
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:46 PM Valentin Petzel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
> thickness is not measured as the shortest distance between the opposing
> sides
> of the boundary, but as vertical distance. This results in Beams
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 7:47 AM Valentin Petzel wrote:
> Are you sure about this? It is incredibly hard to cut diagonal lines with
> a
> chisel. As I mentioned half an hour ago this would have hardly any effect
> in
> the common cases anyway.
>
No, I'm not sure about this. It was my
On 2022-03-25 01:44, Valentin Petzel wrote:
Subject:
Slanted Beams thickness
From:
Valentin Petzel [1]
Date:
2022-03-25 01:44
To:
[2]lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Hello,
Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
thickness is not measured as
I don't see one either, but there appear to be scores in the wild that
use them (I saw an example on the user list, which is what triggered
the original post). The question is whether we consider it fine to
start giving an error on them (it's not a fatal error, doesn't prevent
compilation of
Are you sure about this? It is incredibly hard to cut diagonal lines with a
chisel. As I mentioned half an hour ago this would have hardly any effect in
the common cases anyway.
And my intent is not to propose a new default, but to initiate some
discussion. This should not affect common
Hi Simon,
none of these slopes are extreme enough to really make a difference.
Am Freitag, 25. März 2022, 14:21:12 CET schrieb Simon Albrecht:
> Hi everyone,
>
> On 25/03/2022 01:44, Valentin Petzel wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is,
Le 25/03/2022 à 13:05, Michael Käppler a écrit :
Am 22.03.2022 um 12:57 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
Hi,
With https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1187,
I introduced a change that I didn't notice: something like
\version "2.23"
is now an error. It is accepted with current
Carl,
If you look at the video I posted, could you explain how you see using that
instrument non along its tooling direction? (Like, "diagonally" wrt cutting
edge at the tip) seemd to me it would be very hard to get a straight line
doing so...
L
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, 13:52 Carl Sorensen, wrote:
Hi everyone,
On 25/03/2022 01:44, Valentin Petzel wrote:
Hello,
Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
thickness is not measured as the shortest distance between the opposing sides
of the boundary, but as vertical distance. This results in Beams getting
... which is what Valentin also just said. Sorry Valentin for the double up!
L
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, 13:43 Luca Fascione, wrote:
> Yes but look at the took and how it's held in the hand: you won't ever get
> a clean line from it holding is slanted to the direction of motion, that
> thing is
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 6:46 PM Valentin Petzel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
> thickness is not measured as the shortest distance between the opposing
> sides
> of the boundary, but as vertical distance. This results in Beams
Yes but look at the took and how it's held in the hand: you won't ever get
a clean line from it holding is slanted to the direction of motion, that
thing is meant to be pushed straight ahead...
On Fri, 25 Mar 2022, 13:19 Dan Eble, wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2022, at 04:35, Luca Fascione wrote:
> >
Hello all,
@Abraham: In fact this is not done at scheme level here, but at C++ level.
There reason is that we do not want to change the value of the thickness, but
for Lilypond to think about this thickness in a more natural way. Also this
example already handles the beam distance. For some
On Mar 25, 2022, at 04:35, Luca Fascione wrote:
>
> This video shows Hans Kuehner at work
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvyoKdW-Big
>
> at 4m36 shows beams being engraved, he appears to keep the instrument
> orthogonal to the line direction,
It's fascinating, but those beams are nearly
Am 22.03.2022 um 12:57 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
Hi,
With https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests/1187,
I introduced a change that I didn't notice: something like
\version "2.23"
is now an error. It is accepted with current released versions.
On the other hand, convert-ly has
Sorry, forgot to say: instead of correcting with 1/cos(\theta) I wonder if
correcting with 1/cos(\theta/2) would be an idea?
sl2 = sl / (1+sqrt(1+sl*sl)) // tan(\theta/2)
th *= sqrt(1+sl2*sl2)
HTH
L
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 9:35 AM Luca Fascione wrote:
> This video shows Hans Kuehner at work
>
This video shows Hans Kuehner at work
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvyoKdW-Big
at 4m36 shows beams being engraved, he appears to keep the instrument
orthogonal to the line direction,
which makes Valentin's formula appropriate to capture this process.
(I love it when it goes "What happens
Le 25/03/2022 à 01:44, Valentin Petzel a écrit :
Hello,
Lilypond handles slanted Beams in a geometrically weird way, that is, the
thickness is not measured as the shortest distance between the opposing sides
of the boundary, but as vertical distance. This results in Beams getting
optically
20 matches
Mail list logo
