lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Unifies mensural ligatures with blot-diameter. (issue 5030053)


From: Janek Warchoł
Subject: Re: Unifies mensural ligatures with blot-diameter. (issue 5030053)
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 22:17:35 +0200

2011/9/19  <address@hidden>:
> On 2011/09/18 21:47:04, janek wrote:
>>
>> I think LGTM, but it would be great if you'd add a regtest to
>
> demonstrate what
>>
>> this patch is fixing.
>
> I don't think so. mensural-ligatures.ly contains every case fixed by
> this patch.

True.  However, your changes are very subtle and extremely easy to
overlook.  I'm sure that if someone looked at the regtest comparison
without knowing what to look for, he would miss it entirely and think
that nothing changed.

> If I make a regtest to show such tiny graphical differences, then we
> would need to do the same thing for almost every graphical object...

I seriously consider adding dedicated regtests for all such tiny
graphical differencies.  Please see this thread for a more detailed
discussion about it:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-09/msg00308.html

> http://codereview.appspot.com/5030053/diff/9001/lily/mensural-ligature.cc#newcode79
>>
>> lily/mensural-ligature.cc:79: stencil = Lookup::beam (corrected_slope,
>
> width *
>>
>> 0.5, staff_space, blotdiameter);
>> What does this do? (sorry for a stupid question)
>
> This is making a beam with round corners (blotdiameter is the radius of
> the round corner). These beams are used to represent the flexa (the big
> 'slide' at the end of the before/after PNGs).

Ah, so Lookup::beam () prints a beam sybol!  Nice.

> http://codereview.appspot.com/5030053/diff/9001/lily/mensural-ligature.cc#newcode201
>>
>> lily/mensural-ligature.cc:201: ("noteheads.sM2ligmensural").extent
>> (Y_AXIS).length () * 0.5
>> I don't get it - why is this commented?
>
> Because the stems of these noteheads are not inside their Y-extent. This
> comment shows how this should ideally work.

ok, i understand now.

thanks,
Janek



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]