Re: Potential fix for issue 1504. (issue4237057)

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:08 AM, address@hidden
<address@hidden> wrote:
> On Mar 15, 2011, at 9:03 AM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:16 AM,  <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>>> I've sketched this out using your suggestion above (calculating it once and 
>>> returning the fraction for the called beam) - nevermind my previous 
>>> question about redoing calculations. A new patch set is on-line.
>>
>>> I still need to do the math for the longer slopes - I'll have time to do 
>>> that later today or tomorrow.
>>>
>>> In the spirit of the one-change-per-push idea, I'd like to push the fix to 
>>> 1504 first before I push the change to feather-direction.  Does this seem 
>>> like a good idea?
>>
>> Do you mean: push an earlier version of this patch first?   I think
>> it's not a good idea, because you would rewrite it directly after
>> pushing, cluttering up the history of what is happening.  The idea of
>> one-change-per-push is that all the individual changes are
>> independent.
>
> No, I mean that changing the feather-dir property from ly:dir to a pair seems 
> like a different problem than fixing issue 1504.  It effectively adds a new 
> feature to lilypond, and thus seems like it should be the object of its own 
> patch/push.  However, if you think I

Ah right. My proposal was for feather-dir to be used to init
feather-fractions (or whatever they're called.) - please do what you
think is best, but if you are pushing 2 commits where the 2nd mostly
rewrites the 1st, you might as well skip the 1st.

I would call this a feature, btw;  I don't believe we ever suggested
that breaking feathered beams works.

-- 
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen