Re: beaming regression

[Andrew Hawryluk]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 1:59 PM, Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/12/09 1:41 PM, "Andrew Hawryluk" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> Attached is the output of LilyPond 2.7, which was benchmarked as a
>> near match against Baerenreiter BA320. The current beam positions do
>> not match: the stems are now shorter, on average. (The third measure
>> also has a beaming error of another kind: the first two beats should
>> be grouped separately from each other.)
>
> I cannot see where the stems are shorter on average.  I can see that the
> beamlets are a little bit shorter, but every stem I check between the two
> appears to me to be the same length (except the difference caused by the
> beaming error).

Hmm, I think you're right. I'll do some more research on this one.

> The beaming error in measure 3 is the result of a known bug; the autobeamer
> can't look ahead to see the 1/16 notes on the second beat and end the beam
> after the first beat.
>
> See issue 638
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=638
>

Thanks for the info! I'm glad to know it's not an error in my input.

Andrew