Re: is shapeSlur broken?

[David Nalesnik]

Hi Urs,

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Urs Liska <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi David,

thank you for now. I'll look into it.
But isn't it very likely that I have to reshape a slur anyway when it changes from  broken to unbroken?
In that case I'd even say the errors are a 'feature' so you notice it ...
Provided it is documented enough not to drive you crazy ...

Sure, that's true.  Presumably when you're looking for that fine control, you've settled on the layout in all but the tiny details!  Without the modification, though, the error would cause the file to fail and the error message is a little opaque.  (Well, it's quite exact, but it takes some study to figure out how it happened.) I could create a warning here, something like: "slur is not broken anymore".

One thing you can do is
\shapeSlur #'( ... list of offsets ...)
or
\shapeSlur #'(( ... list of offsets ...))

without the file failing.

Since this function has come up again, I wonder if I could get your (and other people's) opinion on syntax.  When I first wrote the offsetting function (http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=639)I thought that alists were a bother to type.  But 'control-pojnts _is_ an alist '((x1 . y1) (x2 . y2) ... )) , so shouldn't we have something like this?

\shapeSlur #'((dx1 . dy1) (dx2 . dy2) ...)

I realize that there's more to type, but wouldn't this be clearer to use? (As well as being more consistent with how LilyPond represents this type of data)?

Any thoughts?

-David