Menu
▾
▴
#1377 Enhancement: make the last-page spacing more consistent and less tight
Originally created by: *anonymous
Originally created by: v.villenave
Originally owned by: k-ohara5...@oco.net
Here's an idea from David:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2010-10/msg00588.html
"
it would be nice to have an option to let Lilypond use the same space stretching on the last page (in case it fits) than on the last non-ragged-bottom page. It really does not make much aesthetical sense to have just the last page tighter than the rest if the gained bottom space is not actually required for anything.
"
Originally posted by: joenee...@gmail.com
Fix 1377: looser spacing for ragged-last-bottom.
Under ragged-last-bottom, try to make the last page match the
previous page by using the same for for spacing it. Previously,
the last page was never stretched at all, which meant that it always
looked tighter than the previous page.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5241047
Labels: Patch-new
Originally posted by: joenee...@gmail.com
Issue 1959 has been merged into this issue.
Originally posted by: percival.music.ca@gmail.com
Patchy the autobot says: LGTM
Labels: Patch-Review
Originally posted by: percival.music.ca@gmail.com
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Labels: -Patch-Review Patch-review
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Labels: -Patch-review Patch-countdown
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
Counted dfown to n20111011 but no explicit LGTM on Rietveld.
Labels: -Patch-countdown Patch-push
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
What's up with this one?
Originally posted by: pkx1...@gmail.com
Whatever is up with it, it no longer patches on current master.
James
Labels: -Priority-Low -Spacing -Patch-push Patch-needs_work
Originally posted by: k-ohara5...@oco.net
I'll adopt it.
<http://codereview.appspot.com/5484056>
Labels: -Patch-needs_work Patch-new
Status: Started
Originally posted by: lilypond...@gmail.com
Patchy the autobot says: LGTM.
Labels: Patch-review
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Labels: -Patch-review Patch-countdown
Owner: k-ohara5...@oco.net
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
Counted down to 20111215
Labels: -Patch-countdown Patch-push
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
Keith, would you be willing to push this, as it has had a countdown and been set to "push" a couple of days ago?
Originally posted by: k-ohara5...@oco.net
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Labels: -Patch-push Fixed_2_15_23
Status: Fixed
Originally posted by: janek.li...@gmail.com
what was the commit's ID?
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
dak@lola:/usr/local/tmp/lilypond$ git log --format=fuller --grep 1377
commit [r968e4722ea19df8485b5fec506c3b2dc9a29c664]
Author: Keith OHara <k-ohara5a5a@oco.net>
AuthorDate: Mon Dec 12 21:56:57 2011 -0800
Commit: Keith OHara <k-ohara5a5a@oco.net>
CommitDate: Sun Dec 18 21:34:07 2011 -0800
Looser spacing for ragged-last-bottom; issue 1377
Under ragged-last-bottom, try to make the last page match the
previous page by using the same 'force' for spacing it.
Probably check that it has not been reverted and/or that it is working,
but that should be it.
Originally posted by: k-ohara5...@oco.net
I thought there was a test case for this issue, but in fact was posted under duplicate issue 1959:
n = 140
<< \repeat unfold \n c''
\repeat unfold \n c''
\repeat unfold \n c''
\repeat unfold \n c''
\repeat unfold \n c'' >>
Originally posted by: PhilEHol...@googlemail.com
Nice.
Status: Verified
Originally posted by: k-ohara5...@oco.net
A regression test 'optimal-page-breaking-hstretch.ly' stopped showing what it was supposed to show, now that ragged-bottom affects spacing less drastically. The underlying feature still works, so I updated the regression test to show it another way.
At the same time, I removed the regression test 'page-limited-space.ly' for the long-deprecated "page-limit-inter-system-space" that used to control spacing between systems.
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
"The underlying feature still works" seems to be in discord with issue 3341. At least, it only seems to work in some circumstances.
Originally posted by: k-ohara5...@oco.net
Is comment 20 saying that this patch caused issue 3341 ?
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Well, I was in the context of "optimal page breaking". I am not claiming that this patch in particular caused issue 3341. And indeed, it reverts cleanly (apart from a merge conflict in a comment which is irrelevant) and the reverted version still shows the same effect. So it is clear that this patch is not responsible for issue 3341.
But we still have a global page spacing engine that is basically out of control. We have no actual tests for checking that it does anything anywhere close to what it claims to do with regard to global optimization: all fixes to the algorithms have been to exclude excruciatingly bad decisions.
But we have no positive evidence that we don't just get a random (or even the worst) choice among tolerable choices. And the decisions are made independently from the actual spacing, based on a rectangular rather than a skyline model. And the rectangular model does not even share the same code with other positioning mechanisms, so discrepancies can (and will) occur.
We've had anecdotal reports that people continued using 2.12 (or 2.14) since the overall page breaking got worse since then. They may or may not be incorrect, but we don't really have tests that would give us sufficient confidence to state "we are pretty certain you are wrong about that".