Re: a proper whiteout function

[Carl Sorensen]

On 5/18/15 12:04 PM, "Paul Morris" <address@hidden> wrote:

>> On May 17, 2015, at 7:48 PM, Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> wrote:
>> 
>> This is a nice implementation -- I didn't think it could be done!
>
>Thanks Carl!
>
>> I think
>> it should be made part of LilyPond, if the performance hit is not too
>>big.
>> It seems to create a lot of stencils, but maybe that is no problem.
>
>I wondered whether or not it should be part of LilyPond (with this
>implementation) but I¹ll be glad to submit it.   If there is a
>performance hit, it will at least be limited because it will likely not
>be used on that many stencils in any given score.

One more thing that ought to be considered.  Should offset be a context
property rather than an argument?  I'm not sure one way or the other, but
we probably should think about it.

On the one hand, it would be nice to do something like

\set Score.whiteoutOffset = #.3

On the other hand, it seems somewhat strange to have c whiteoutOffset
property associated with anything other than a Grob.  But you wouldn't
want to have to set a whiteoutOffset property for each Grob, so setting
the whiteout as part of the stencil property for the grob (as an argument)
seems the best way to go if you want to have Grob-by-Grob specific offsets.

Perhaps if you're going to do Grob-by-Grob specific offsets, there should
be all three parameters as arguments: offset, radius-increment, and
angle-copies  (names are not final yet, just an initial guess).

At any rate, there should probably be a user-specifiable way to change all
three values that govern the performance, whether by context properties or
by arguments.

Thanks,

Carl