I understand that Dorico is using repeating glyphs, so I know why this is happening, but it’s still undesirable.
In the example below, I need the wavy line to end at the barline, actually touching it. It is, in fact, attached to the barline in theory, but as casting off changes, I can get gaps as large as the one you see below, since there isn’t enough space to complete a new iteration of the glyph. Manual positioning isn’t a good idea, because further casting off changes will throw it off.
I’d like to request… somehow… that these wavy lines be able to flex with the barline so they remain truly “attached.” Not sure if such a thing is possible, but asking anyways. Thanks!
I wonder if perhaps it might be possible for it to do a partial repetition of the glyph - truncate the last iteration of the glyph to the bar line or beat where it ends? Although, depending on the situation, that might end up looking a little strange.
In the fullness of time we will add lines drawn using primitives rather than glyphs, but it’s not something you should expect imminently.
Daniel, just out of curiosity, as I am not familiar with the terms, but interested:
What is the difference between primitives and glyphs?
A glyph is a fixed unit in this case. The wavy line is made out of glyphs: each glyph is one “wavelength.” Dorico can’t draw a partial curves; it’s dealing in integers.
A primitive can be incremental, allowing any portion of the curve to be drawn as needed.
Yes, when I say “primitive” I mean that we use lower-level drawing APIs to draw lines, curves, text, etc. In Dorico, a note is made up of a combination of glyphs and primitives; the notehead and the flag (if the note is flagged) are glyphs, the stem and beam (if the note is beamed) are primitives. I’m sure there’s a better term for the distinction between these two types of drawing, but it’s certainly what we colloquially say within the team when we want to draw the distinction between the two.
Very interesting, thank you both!