Re: Issue 307 in lilypond: collision slur with tuplet bracket

[address@hidden]

Between the two options attached, which one is better?  I like the first...but 
I'm the contemporary music attaché and know nothing about how normal music is 
supposed to look :)

PastedGraphic-1.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

PastedGraphic-2.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

Both of them use:

\relative c' {
  \override Slur #'details #'region-size = #6
  c'2( \times 2/3 { g4 e c) }
}

The top is my current slur work, the bottom is current master.
In either case, the region size needs to be made pretty large.
I see two possible solutions:

1)  Increase the region size in cases where there are potential collisions 
(bad).
2)  Keep the region size the same but brute-force move the base attachments to 
a good region in the spirit of Beam::shift_region_to_valid (good).

Cheers,
MS

On Jul 24, 2011, at 7:29 AM, address@hidden wrote:

> 
> Comment #5 on issue 307 by address@hidden: collision slur with tuplet bracket
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=307
> 
> For my test case, I suggest to position the `more local' context next to the 
> staff.  Thus I would like to have the tuple bracket unchanged, and the slur 
> ending higher.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bug-lilypond mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond