Re: Microtonal Helmholtz-Ellis notation in Lilypond: fine-tuning

[Hans Aberg]

On 26 Sep 2009, at 11:01, Graham Breed wrote:

> > Isn't the lookup dynamic, so one only gets a warning when it  
> > actually needs a glyph for an alteration? - But it is a good idea  
> > to define a glyph for each alteration.
>
> Yes, but we've overridden the glyph lookup to use strings from  
> external fonts.  There's no need to define glyphs at all except to  
> suppress this warning.  It's there because some redundant code is  
> still being executed.  If we knew the right plumbing we wouldn't  
> need them at all, and should be able to leave the X- and Y-extents  
> implicit.  But this is the current state of the art.

Thanks for the explanation. I recall that: LilyPond has more than one  
glyph-finding model. That was a problem with the key signatures, I  
think, which could not use those from external fonts.

  Hans