Re: Fixes position of mensural c clef (issue 6503091)

[lemzwerg]

> I was aware of a slight difference, although actually I'm
> not certain it's that important - these are machine drawn
> glyphs intending to replicate hand-drawn clefs from the
> 15th century.  How important is 0.1 staff space?

This is not the point.  Your are changing the shape without documenting
this fact.  And the problem is not 0.1 staff space but loosing the
vertical symmetry for no good reasons.

> I use Gedit and by default for mf files it puts tabs at 4 spaces,
> and so the indenting looked completely awry.

Good goodness!  This is a plain wrong default.  If in doubt, *always*
use 8 spaces for a tab.  This is UNIX standard since the very beginning.
 Everything else is evil.

> IMHO mixing tabs and spaces is a really bad idea for that
> reason - different editors indent different ways.

Hmm, the rule `1 physical tab = 8 spaces' is standard on UNIX boxes
since 30 years? 40 years?

> As for the overlaps.  Ditto I'll look at that.  The original code
> calculated end points in a very odd way - it allowed, for example,
> of different amounts of shift between the breves, and then ignored
> that in the calculation of the decorations.  I'll see if I can
> improve this.

Thanks.


http://codereview.appspot.com/6503091/