Re: hairpin length

[David Nalesnik]

Hi,

On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 11:11 AM, David Nalesnik
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Simon Albrecht <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 18.06.2016 17:27, David Nalesnik wrote:
>>>
>>> (I would propose that bound-padding be redefined as a pair in the code
>>> base.  Broken-bound-padding, too.  The latter is not replaced with a
>>> broken-bound-padding-pair in this code experiment, but that should be easily
>>> done.)
>>
>>
>> Well, it should be pretty easy to use number-or-pair?, shouldn’t it? That
>> way you can use both as a matter of convenience.
>>
>
> That should be workable.
>
> Also, I see now that the situation with broken hairpins is a bit more
> complex (bound-padding still does have an impact).  Will see what I
> can do about that, and your suggestion, Simon.
>
> David

OK, I think I took the wrong tack with bound-padding.  Evidently,
bound-padding is designed to change hairpin endpoints when dynamics
are present.

The attached code introduces the idea of 'shorten-pair with hairpins.
My first idea, should've stuck with that.

Positive values shorten the hairpin, negative values lengthen it.

Hope this proves useful.

David

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

hairpin-shorten-pair.ly
Description: Text Data