[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: 2.13.48 not good IMO
From: |
Keith OHara |
Subject: |
Re: 2.13.48 not good IMO |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Feb 2011 06:22:00 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) |
胡海鹏 - Hu Haipeng <hhpmusic <at> 163.com> writes:
>
> Hello, I think 2.13.48 is not as good as 2.13.46. I compiled the work
> I'm working on, in .46, it takes 45 pages, with only a (de)crescendo too
> small warning; while in .48, it takes 48 pages, and gives many that warnings.
> Haipeng
>
The were two changes that could be expected to take more space. One change
prevented rests from overlapping a key signature at key changes. The other
change prevents notes from being moved over things, such as bar lines, if
they would be too close vertically to the other thing.
I can imagine these changes might cause the 6% increase in length.
I saw different results with my larger scores. The scores of 54, 42, and 23
pages stayed the same number of pages. A 16-page score on .46, takes only 15
pages on .48. So overall it looks good to me.