From 9ffa703e8ffed4c3abe57741c8382479b85e13f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: hanwen <hanwen>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 02:26:09 +0000
Subject: [PATCH] 	* mf/feta-bolletjes.mf: rewrite note head MF code. 
 (test_outlines): make heads more rotund for smaller sizes.

---
 mf/feta-beugel.mf |  6 ++++++
 mf/feta-params.mf | 14 ++++++++------
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mf/feta-beugel.mf b/mf/feta-beugel.mf
index 82f996fee9..a71c2bf789 100644
--- a/mf/feta-beugel.mf
+++ b/mf/feta-beugel.mf
@@ -1,5 +1,11 @@
+
+
 input feta-autometric;
 input feta-macros;
+
+staffsize# := 20 pt#;  %% arbitrary.
+
+
 input feta-params;
 
 font_coding_scheme "feta braces";
diff --git a/mf/feta-params.mf b/mf/feta-params.mf
index 928828d3fb..00a4d45542 100644
--- a/mf/feta-params.mf
+++ b/mf/feta-params.mf
@@ -1,23 +1,25 @@
 
 stafflines = 5;
-% [reuter] URG!  This is not always true.  One of the effects of
-% keeping this a constant is that, for notation with less stafflines,
-% stafflinethickness gets too small.
 
-staff_space#:=staffsize#/(stafflines-1);
+%
+% The design size of a staff should really be the 
+% staff_space, but we use staffsize for historical reasons.
+% 
+staff_space# = staffsize#/(stafflines-1);
 
 
 
 % measuring on pocket scores turns out: stafflinethickness is
 % independent on staff size, and generally 0.5 pt.
-stafflinethickness#  :=0.5 pt#; 
+
+stafflinethickness#  = 0.5 pt#; 
 
 %
 % bigger puff_up_factor, relatively thicker stafflines.
 % 20 pt = puff_up_factor 0.
 % 10 pt = puff_up_factor 1
 %
-puff_up_factor =  (stafflinethickness# - 0.1 staff_space#) / (.1 staff_space#);
+puff_up_factor =  (stafflinethickness# - 0.1 staff_space#) / (0.1 staff_space#);
 
 
 
-- 
2.39.5