On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:59 AM,
<address@hidden> wrote:
I've uploaded a new patch set for review, but I still have
some questions.
First, some questions for Joe Neeman:
Joe, with commit 7d410b9 (from 2009-12-17), in NR 4.4.1
"Vertical spacing inside a system - Spacing between staves",
you wrote:
If unset, stretchability defaults to
space - minimum-distance.
This isn't quite accurate: actually, our "ideal" springs have two different spring constants, one for compressing and one for stretching. The default stretchability is (space - minimum-distance) for compressing and space for stretching (the stretching one is probably more important in practice).
But 4 months later, with commit d701703 (2010-04-20), in
lily/spacing-basic.cc, you wrote:
By default, the spring will have an
inverse_stretch_strength of space+min_dist.
Is this a contradiction? Could you confirm the default
calculation of 'stretchability? (Unfortunately, I don't
speak C/C++).
This is for horizontal spacing, not vertical spacing. Also, the comment means to say: "if not for the next line of code, the default _would be_ space+min_dist,
Also, I rewrote the 'stretchability entry; can you
double-check that there's nothing erroneous/misleading?
Should I remove the +inf.0 bit?
+inf.0 will cause a programming_error (and it will be ignored). Internally, we use 1e7 for an almost infinitely stretchable spring.
Cheers,
Joe