Re: [bug?] Line_interface::line

[Juergen Reuter]

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:

> address@hidden writes:
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> > 
> > > address@hidden writes:
> > > >   else
> > > >     {
> > > >       return make_line (thick, from, to);
> > > >     }
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Are you sure that the "else" branch (i.e. making a solid line) should 
> > > > be 
> > > > regardless of the "style" property entered only if "scm_is_number 
> > > > (dash_fraction)" evaluates to false?
> > > 
> > > I don't understand. If you want dashed lines, you should set
> > > dash-fraction.
> > > 
> > 
> > No, the opposite.  I want a solid line, but I always get a dashed line:
> 
> then unset dash-fraction.
> 

Well, ...

(1) There is no \unset command for grob properties (at least not that I 
    know of).  Hence, I guess by "unset dash-fraction" you mean 
    "\override TextSpanner #'dash-fraction = #'()"?  At least, this trick 
    seems to do the job.

(2) I think it is a design flaw that you have to unset the dash-fraction 
    property (which, by default, is set to some value) in order to make 
    the style property work.  If this intended, it should at least be 
    clearly documented in the manual that changing the style property of 
    TextSpanner by default has no effect.

> > The above code produces a dashed line instead of a solid one.  Actually, 
> > it seems there are at least two bugs, because even if I change 
> > Line_interface::line () such that the else branch is entered for solid 
> > lines (by removing the "scm_is_number (dash_fraction)" clause in the if 
> > condition), I still get a dashed line.
> 
> hmm. interesting. can you add a .ly snippet to the bug database?  
> 

It just turned out that the .pdf output on my machine was created from an 
outdated .ps file, such that I got a wrong .pdf output.  Unsetting 
dash-fraction seems to be sufficient.

Greetings,
Jürgen