Re: Problem with horizontal beams

[Ralph Palmer]

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:23 AM, Phil Holmes <address@hidden> wrote:

> "Graham Percival" <address@hidden> wrote in message
> news:address@hidden
>
>  On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 01:24:26PM +0000, James Lowe wrote:
>>
>>> There seems to be an inconsistency with setting horizontal beams.
>>> \override Beam #'damping = #+inf.0
>>>
>>
>> IIRC, this is a hack rather than an "officially supported" thing
>> (whatever that might mean).
>>
>>  We have a snippet where we state that
>>>
>>
>> Correction: somebody posted a snippet in which they *claimed*
>> that:
>>
>>  Should generate horizontal beams in all cases.
>>>
>>
>> and no developer has said "that snippet is obviously wrong" (quite
>> possibly because nobody's looked at it)
>>
>> We simply do not have the resources to ensure quality/truth in
>> snippets, either in LSR itself, or even in the subset that we
>> include in our docs.
>>
>>
>> That said, I agree that it would be useful to be able to get
>> horizontal beams.  The name might be \beamHorizontal, but that's a
>> useless detail that's pointless to quibble about.  The important
>> thing is adding this new feature to the beaming code.
>>
>> Bug squad: I suggest Enhancement-Low-Frog.  Frog ETA: 10 hours.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - Graham
>>
>
> I'd suggest the snippet is worth sorting out, too.  What do you reckon -
> adding the commands
>
>    \override Beam #'details #'damping-direction-penalty = #0
>    \override Beam #'details #'round-to-zero-slope = #0
>
> to the existing snippet, or a new one pointed to by the old one, that says
> "if  \override Beam #'damping = #+inf.0 doesn't do what you want, add the
> other commands too, as shown here"?
>
>
Submitted as issue 1493 :
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1493

Pondly,

Ralph