lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: IR issues


From: Phil Holmes
Subject: Re: IR issues
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 13:26:51 -0000

----- Original Message ----- From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
To: "Urs Liska" <address@hidden>
Cc: "lilypond-user" <address@hidden>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: IR issues


Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

Am 23.11.2015 um 11:20 schrieb David Kastrup:

At any rate, you can also play with settings height-limit and ratio.

OK, I've now found out how height-limit and ratio play together.
Actually ratio is the setting to deal with the behaviour of curves of
different length.

Interestingly I have to override Slur.height-limit but
Tie.details.height-limit

But looking for another property of Slurs and Ties leads me to another
question:
Is this:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/internals/slur
and
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/internals/slur_002dinterface

really the reference for how I can change the appearance of slurs and ties?

If that's true I think it's really awful. I know the IR is a *reference*
and not a tutorial but I'm sure that *noone* will be able to look up the
information for tweaks they need anything near efficiently. The majority
of properties is described in a completely inaccessible manner.

The IR is a programmers' reference.  For power users, it's more like a
last resort.  Of course that does not mean that incomprehensible
documentation strings are a feature rather than a problem, but it does
mean that
a) the organization of properties in a user-friendly way is not a
priority: end users should rather get stuff like \shape to work with, or
style files (which we don't really have).
b) reworking this into a consistently friendly resource where each
property description is reasonably understandable on its own is a large
chunk of work.  Some fly-by fixes will not suffice for making a dent in
the overall character of the IR.


Don't agree with that. It seems to me that if someone looks at some doc-strings, finds them incomprehensible and then comes up with a patch that makes them better, then we're moving forward, albeit slowly. I think it would be beneficial if Urs could propose a patch that will fix this issue. Others can do the same as they come across them.

--
Phil Holmes



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]