# dynamics and accidentals

4 messages
Open this post in threaded view
|

## dynamics and accidentals

 I think that the current code which handles collisions between accidentals and dynamics is `too good'.  Have a look at this example:   \relative {     e4\p dis\p cis\p b\p ais\p   }   \paper {     ragged-right = ##t   } IMHO, you either need a perfect skyline algorithm with quite exact boundaries so that such unnatural big distances are avoided, or, which is perhaps sufficient, just ignore accidentals for positioning articulation signs below or above note heads. Before entering this into the bug database I want to hear your opinions.     Werner _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel piano.png (4K) Download Attachment
Open this post in threaded view
|

## Re: dynamics and accidentals

 Werner LEMBERG wrote: > I think that the current code which handles collisions between > accidentals and dynamics is `too good'.  Have a look at this example: ... > IMHO, you either need a perfect skyline algorithm with quite exact > boundaries so that such unnatural big distances are avoided, or, which > is perhaps sufficient, just ignore accidentals for positioning > articulation signs below or above note heads. If we ignore articulations, we occasionally have collisions between accidentals on notes below the staff and longer dynamics (like mp or mf).  I'd rather have the current extra space then collisions in default output. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel