[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision
From: |
address@hidden |
Subject: |
Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision |
Date: |
Tue, 6 Nov 2012 06:52:15 +0100 |
On 6 nov. 2012, at 04:51, Keith OHara <address@hidden> wrote:
> mike <at> mikesolomon.org <mike <at> mikesolomon.org> writes:
>
>> On 5 nov. 2012, at 11:15, Werner LEMBERG <wl <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> So the answer is yes: The height (resp. the depth) is larger for
>>> outside-staff glyphs.
>>>
>>
>> So we officially have a circular dependency: in order to know the height
>> (for collision resolution) we need to know the extent, but in order to
>> know the extent (because of the glyph) we need to know the height.
>
> Just to be clear, rest-collision.cc breaks the circular dependency by setting
> positioning-done := true,
I'm still not sure how this breaks the dependency. If I look up the extent of
a rest, this will set 'Y-extent to 'calculation-in-progress for the rest.
Then, when 'Y-extent is read again in calc_positioning_done, it will still be
'calculation-in-progress. Setting 'positioning-done to #t only prevents
calc_positioning_done by being called multiple times (say by other rests) - it
doesn't fill in the 'calculation-in-progress for 'Y-extent. Or am I missing
something?
Cheers,
MS
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, (continued)
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, David Kastrup, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, David Kastrup, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, Werner LEMBERG, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, Keith OHara, 2012/11/05
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision,
address@hidden <=
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, Keith OHara, 2012/11/07
- Re: Design flaw in Rest_collision, address@hidden, 2012/11/07