Re: [SPAM] Re: vertical position of secondary beams

[David Kastrup]

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 24.01.2014 21:29, schrieb Janek Warchoł:
>> Hi Urs,
>>
>> 2014/1/24 Urs Liska <address@hidden>:
>>> All non-standard stuff is just as I want it except one:
>>> The secondary beam at the last (the smaller) bes should be closer to the
>>> main beam in order _not_ to clash with the thicker beam.
>>>
>>> So which grob and which property do I have to override to move that beamlet?
>>
>> \override Beam #'length-fraction = #0.5
>>
>
> Thanks. That's indeed the solution.
>
>> Small wonder you couldn't find it...  I don't know who chose this
>> name, but it's definitely nuts!
>
> I'd rather say the question is how this got through review ...

What review?  Reviews are very spotty, and mostly focus on technical
details.  No users are providing any usability feedback in the LilyPond
code reviews.  And settings like these are more likely than not ushered
in without separate mention in the course of larger changes in
typesetting algorithms.  So one actually needs to read through the code
and/or well-known files containing changed/added properties and
hopefully their documentation to give feedback _before_ such things
appear in a developer version.

-- 
David Kastrup