Re: Directional NoteHead Stencil Support

[Thomas Morley]

2015-03-21 14:32 GMT+01:00 Marc Hohl <address@hidden>:
> Am 21.03.2015 um 00:40 schrieb Thomas Morley:
>
>> 2015-03-21 0:09 GMT+01:00 Thomas Morley <address@hidden>:
>>
>>>
>>> The 'arpeggio-property was deleted somewhere during 2.17. and I never
>>> managed to get back the info whether a NoteColumn has an arpeggio,
>>
>>
>> Btw, I tried again to find the commit on the tracker which removed the
>> 'arpeggio-property (and probably the reason for it) and again without
>> success.
>
>
> I think it is
>
> 5ab8335d106d736335698245af3c1b2b2455aed6
>
>
>     Adds arpeggio to conditional item grob array.
>
>     The actual function of conditional elements was not correctly reflected
>     in the comment above Separation_item::boxes.  This comment led one to
> believe
>     that conditional elements were only used when notes with accidentals
>     had ties coming to them.  This is not true.  Conditional elements are
> always
>     used for right columns when there is something to the left (see
>     Spacing_interface::skylines).  They are omitted _only_ when they are
>     accidentals with ties coming to them.
>
>     So why do we want an arpeggio to be a conditional element?  There is
>     nothing conditional about it (it will always be printed, unlike
> accidentals
>     with ties going to them).  It is because conditional elements have the
>     double duty of being conditional (i.e. accidentals) AND being factored
>     into springs in note spacing (see the long comment in
>     Note_spacing::get_spacing) in the calculation of a spring's ideal
> distance.
>     Other elements to the left of a note column, like scripts and
> fingerings,
>     are only factored into the minimum distance. We want arpeggios to factor
>     into the ideal distance because otherwise they will be too close to
>     left note-columns in tight spacing situations.
>
>     Lastly, there was no reason in the code base to keep a pointer to the
>     arpeggio in the note column, so it is removed here.
>
> ---
> HTH,
>
> Marc


2015-03-21 14:37 GMT+01:00 David Nalesnik <address@hidden>:
[...]
>
> P.S.  Just this moment, Marc Hohl posted the commit message I was ready to
> cut-and-paste!  FWIW, I'll mention how I found it (though my bag of tricks
> is pretty small).  I used
>
> git log -p lily/rhythmic-column-engraver.cc
>

Thanks Marc and David pointing me in the correct direction.

This is issue 3289
https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3289

Curing a regression detected in 2.17. which was introduced during 2.15.

Though, I have never seen this commit-message before!
During the revue on Rietvield some more extended message was wished
and obviously added right before pushing - no chance for anyone to
look at it.

If I had seen:
>     Lastly, there was no reason in the code base to keep a pointer to the
>     arpeggio in the note column, so it is removed here.
I would have protested strongly.

Instead
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=621
is partly broken.

http://lilypondblog.org/2013/06/horizontally-aligning-full-measure-rests/
is partly broken.

Also, some of my custom-functions are partly broken or never reached
usability because of that missing 'arpeggio-property.
Letting me no reasonable chance to get back the needed info.
For more than a year!

Color me annoyed and frustrated.
Right now I have no interest in fixing the above.
I'll let that to someone else, maybe the committer.


-Harm