lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Inconsistent beam-slope?


From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Inconsistent beam-slope?
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 23:56:46 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Thomas Morley <address@hidden> writes:

> while working on automated slashed Beams, I noticed my
> stencil-procedure was always inexact for non-horizontal Beams. I
> looked at 'X-positions and 'positions of a Beam to get it's slope and
> derived the slope from those values.
>
> But the visible gradient obviously relies on blot-diameter as well.
> Look at the attached image (code for it below). There you can always
> see three overlayed Beams with blot-diameters: 0, 0.5 and 1
> For _identical_ 'positions the _visible_ slope is not the same. And
> I've got the impression the difference increases with steeped
> beam-slope.
>
> Is this intended or a bug?
>
> Thanks,
>   Harm
>
> Here the used code:
>
> {
>   \override Beam.stencil =
>     #(lambda (grob)
>        (let* ((layout  (ly:grob-layout grob)))
>          (ly:stencil-add
>            (begin
>             (ly:output-def-set-variable! layout 'blot-diameter 1)
>              (stencil-with-color (ly:beam::print grob) black))
>            (begin
>              (ly:output-def-set-variable! layout 'blot-diameter 0.5)
>              (stencil-with-color (ly:beam::print grob) red))
>            (begin
>              (ly:output-def-set-variable! layout 'blot-diameter 0)
>              (stencil-with-color (ly:beam::print grob) cyan)))))
>
>
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 8)
>   b8^[ b]
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 7)
>   b8^[ b]
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 6)
>   b8^[ b]
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 5)
>   b8^[ b]
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 4)
>   b8^[ b]
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 3)
>   b8^[ b]
>   \override Beam.positions = #'(2 . 2)
>   b8^[ b]
> }

You talk about beam slope a lot but instead specify beam positions.
I get the impression that those positions are heeded pretty well, so
I don't see fit to label this as a bug.  What would you think qualifies
as problematic here?

-- 
David Kastrup



reply via email to

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