Re: Improvements to Postscript backend (new patch)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improvements to Postscript backend (new patch)

David Feuer-2
I haven't yet found a better name for str4, or written a comment about
kerning, but I've made enough improvements that I think it's time to
send the patch in again.  Diff apparently got sick of all the changes
in output-ps.scm, so it did a really lousy job, even with -d.  Sorry
about that.  Reminder: this patch is against 2.8.0.  I strongly
suggest that you _not_ attempt to apply it to any version of
output-ps.scm other than that, because it will fry.  I'd like to
discuss conventions for PostScript at some point, but right now I have
to go.  Basic question: should drawing procedures all start at the
current point (they don't now)?  Should they all start at (0,0) (they
don't now)?  Or should some start one place and some another place,
with some kind of system for deciding?  I don't know if I'll be able
to do any more work on this for a while, so I'd appreciate if someone
else would take care of any small changes that may be necessary (e.g.,
to variable names).

Changelog:

Changes to PostScript backend:
glyph-string now produces smaller, more readable, and probably faster PostScript
Several findfont scalefont setfont instances changed to selectfont
Hacked-up string-appends changed to formats.

David Feuer

_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

pschanges.diff (17K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improvements to Postscript backend (new patch)

Han-Wen Nienhuys-2
David Feuer wrote:

> I haven't yet found a better name for str4, or written a comment about
> kerning, but I've made enough improvements that I think it's time to
> send the patch in again.  Diff apparently got sick of all the changes
> in output-ps.scm, so it did a really lousy job, even with -d.  Sorry
> about that.  Reminder: this patch is against 2.8.0.  I strongly
> suggest that you _not_ attempt to apply it to any version of
> output-ps.scm other than that, because it will fry.  I'd like to
> discuss conventions for PostScript at some point, but right now I have
> to go.  Basic question: should drawing procedures all start at the
> current point (they don't now)?  Should they all start at (0,0) (they
> don't now)?  Or should some start one place and some another place,
> with some kind of system for deciding?  

AFAIK, they all start at (0,0)

--

Han-Wen Nienhuys - [hidden email] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

LilyPond Software Design
  -- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improvements to Postscript backend (new patch)

David Feuer-2
On 3/29/06, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[hidden email]> wrote:
> David Feuer wrote:
> > to go.  Basic question: should drawing procedures all start at the
> > current point (they don't now)?  Should they all start at (0,0) (they
> > don't now)?  Or should some start one place and some another place,
> > with some kind of system for deciding?
>
> AFAIK, they all start at (0,0)

I was including text-drawing procedures as well.  Thinking more about
it tonight, I've concluded that it's really ugly to have them start
anywhere but the current point.  If they want to translate, they can
do that themselves.  Filling the whole file with translations is bad.
I'd really appreciate if you'd try to decide ASAP whether to accept my
patch.  Despite my fears, I've managed to spend some more time
improving other aspects of the postscript backend, and I'd like to
have a good base to work from.

David Feuer


_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improvements to Postscript backend (new patch)

Han-Wen Nienhuys-2
David Feuer wrote:

> On 3/29/06, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> David Feuer wrote:
>>> to go.  Basic question: should drawing procedures all start at the
>>> current point (they don't now)?  Should they all start at (0,0) (they
>>> don't now)?  Or should some start one place and some another place,
>>> with some kind of system for deciding?
>> AFAIK, they all start at (0,0)
>
> I was including text-drawing procedures as well.  Thinking more about
> it tonight, I've concluded that it's really ugly to have them start
> anywhere but the current point.  If they want to translate, they can
> do that themselves.  Filling the whole file with translations is bad.
> I'd really appreciate if you'd try to decide ASAP whether to accept my
> patch.  Despite my fears, I've managed to spend some more time
> improving other aspects of the postscript backend, and I'd like to
> have a good base to work from.

I'll put them in the 2.9 branch, but I'm still engrossed in getting the
binary builds out of the door.


--

Han-Wen Nienhuys - [hidden email] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

LilyPond Software Design
  -- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com



_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel