Re: partcombine, but including rests from quiet voices?

[Graham Percival]

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 04:14:17 +0100
Reinhold Kainhofer <address@hidden> wrote:

> I now made a file with some test cases for the part combination with
> comments in the .ly file (Attached). One can 
> clearly see several bugs..

If you want these in the tracker, please split them into
individual minimal examples.  Although in this case I could just
dump the whole thing as "partcombine bugs". (see below)

> I also read in some messages that the current implementation of the 
> partcombiner is a hack and should be replaced by a version that uses 
> streams... What's all this about? Are there still plans to
> significantly rewrite the partcombiner? If so, I won't touch it and
> invest time in code, which will later be replaced anyway.

As far as I know, there is a strong desire to completely rewrite
the partcombiner, but no _plans_ to do so.  Basically, it's not
worth fixing any bugs in partcombine because it sucks so much, but
nobody has the time/interest in undertaking the complete rewrite.

Grace notes suffer from the same condition.  As does ancient
notation, abc2ly, and probably half a dozen other things that
don't come to mind at the moment.  I'm therefore not overly eager
to file more bugs in the tracker about these items.

Rewriting partcombine could be a great project for you to learn
more about lilypond code, hint hint.  :)

Cheers,
- Graham