Re: Add tab-tie-follow-engraver (issue2723043)

[Carl . D . Sorensen]

On 2010/11/04 08:31:30, marc wrote:

> No, I don't think we should it do more complicated that necessary.
> Perhaps the name 'tie-follow is misleading, but the engraver (before
you
> left out the slur and glissando bits) did the right job - marking
exactly
> the tab-note-heads that have to be treated specially.

> If we mark *every* tied-to note, we have to mark *every* start of a
slur
> and *every* start
> of a glissando as well and check for the appearance of (and
('tie-follow
> (or ( 'slur-start 'gliss-start)))),
> which is overkill - just let the engraver take the decision, raise a
> flag, and the callbacks do their job.

But right now, the callbacks are fighting over the notes -- and I don't
think that's right.  In order to work correctly, we need to know the
order in which the callbacks are called.

I've got an algorithm that I think is clearer and simplifies the
callbacks, but I haven't been able to fully test it yet because I can't
get the C++ engraver to work right in terms of checking equality.

I'll post a patch for comments.

Thanks,

Carl


http://codereview.appspot.com/2723043/