Re: Cleanup beam scoring code. (issue4001046)

[Reinhold Kainhofer]

Am Mittwoch, 2. Februar 2011, um 06:49:14 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> > There is one diff remaining: see the attached file.  I introduced
> > some streamlining of an inner loop, which affects the way we handle
> > beams that start/end with invisible stems.
> > 
> > The compare image is the new one.  I have no examples of tremolo beams
> > handy, but the new layout actually looks better to me.
> 
> For me, it doesn't.  

The beams are better in that they are not so far away from the whole notes any 
more, but it's still not ideal.

> While the old behaviour is not optimal, the new
> one looks really worse to me, especially in bar 3 (which is admittedly
> a quite artificial example).  The most important issue for me: Why is
> there no slant of the beams?  

I wanted to ask the same: According to Gardner Read (p. 236-237) and Kurt 
Stone (p. 150-151), the beams of whole-note tremolos are slanted like with 
shorter durations with stems, but the beams are placed centered between the 
whole notes (i.e. not where an imaginary stem would end!). The only situation 
where an imaginary stem is used to determine the position/slant of the beams 
is in cross-staff tremolos.

If you want, I can take images of those pages.

Cheers,
Reinhold
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhold Kainhofer, address@hidden, http://reinhold.kainhofer.com/
 * Financial & Actuarial Math., Vienna Univ. of Technology, Austria
 * http://www.fam.tuwien.ac.at/, DVR: 0005886
 * LilyPond, Music typesetting, http://www.lilypond.org