[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: self-alignment-X has negligible effects on dynamics

From: Janek Warchoł
Subject: Re: self-alignment-X has negligible effects on dynamics
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 22:37:01 +0200

Time to get back to work! :)

2014-07-28 23:33 GMT+02:00 Trevor Daniels <address@hidden>:
> If your code changes necessitate a change to the documentation and you
> haven't done this yourself, please add an issue to the tracker explaining
> what changes and/or additions need to be made to the documentation at
> the time the code change is pushed.  Remember at the time you push
> your changes it is likely that you are the only one who understands what
> the implications are re the documentation.  It is unlikely any doc editor
> will pick this up otherwise.

Yes, you're right.  I should have opened an issue after pushing code
for issue 3978.

Anyway, i'm going to wait until we decide how the alignment stuff
should work, and when the new version of the code is approved, i'll
write a doc draft with usage examples, leaving it to the doc writers
to polish it up.  That should be an efficient use of both my time and
doc writers' time.

2014-07-28 23:56 GMT+02:00 David Nalesnik <address@hidden>:
> Hi Janek,
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>
> wrote:
>> {
>>   \override DynamicText.X-offset =
>> #ly:self-alignment-interface::x-aligned-on-self
>>   \override DynamicText.self-alignment-X = #RIGHT
>>   c'4\f
>>   \override DynamicText.self-alignment-X = #LEFT
>>   c'4\f
>>   \override DynamicText.self-alignment-X = #CENTER
>>   c'4\f
>> }
>> will produce different output before and after my patch.  That's
>> because before my patch DynamicTexts' position was calculated from
>> x-aligned-on-self AND centered-on-x-parent, in a way that was opaque
>> and not configurable by the user.  Of course, it's possible to mimic
>> old behaviour.
> Are you referring to that ly:make-simple-closure stuff which was commonly
> found in X-offset callbacks?  If so, I don't think this was ever the setting
> for DynamicText.X-offset.  At least, in 2.18.2, we have
>  (X-offset . ,ly:self-alignment-interface::x-aligned-on-self)
> And of course in 2.19.10, we have
> (X-offset . ,ly:self-alignment-interface::aligned-on-x-parent)

Indeed, that was the "default value" of the property (i.e what people
could see in scm/define-grobs.scm).  But there was also a call to
centered-on-x-parent _hardcoded_ in C++ code.  Because of that
hardcoded part, the actual X-offset value was different from what
you'd get just from x-aligned-on-self.  Very nasty, i think i lost
half a day looking for the explanation.  My patch removed that
hardcoded stuff (at least for dynamics; there's a similar problem with
fingerings but there's something else in the code that prevented me
from making the change there).

2014-07-29 0:58 GMT+02:00 Thomas Morley <address@hidden>:
> Well, the output while using 'self-alignment-X with DynamicText _has_ changed.
> This needs thoroughly documentation.
> And it will likely break some of my custom-functions.

Don't worry, we'll get this fixed so that your functions should
continue to work :)
See https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4036#c14

> I uploaded two images for better comparing, with ref-points and
> testing TextScript, too:
> 2.18.0
> http://imgur.com/2vcBG3n.png
> 2.19.11
> http://imgur.com/vE8HaSg.png



reply via email to

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