Kieren MacMillan <kieren_macmillan <at> sympatico.ca> writes: > The linked issue (https://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail? id=1228) currently has a > status of “abandoned” — well, at least the associated patch does, if not the whole issue. > > Is there a technical reason why the most up-to-date engraver (e.g., > https://github.com/openlilylib/openlilylib/blob/ c53380f5ca460d244a017389dc4bcb79a3f04d14/editorial-tools/merge-rests- engraver/definition.ily) > has not been (or cannot be) rolled into the main Lilypond codebase? Or is it technically sound, and now it's > only a matter of somebody making an appropriate/official patch and submitting it? >
The latest code looks reasonable. It needs testing and somebody willing to potentially modify it to cooperate with the rest of the code. It sets merged rests to staff-position 0, so it might interfere in mysterious ways people setting their rests by hand... the automated testing reveals things like this. It is a layer over the existing rest_collision_engraver, so either we check that each layer has a distinct-enough job that they won't confuse each other, or integrate the two rest-collision engravers into one. I never looked at this patch because from the issue title "\override RestCollision #'positioning-done = #merge-rests-on-positioning" I didn't recognize what problem it was trying to solve, even though I am often annoyed by that problem. I'll try to change the title and add an example of what we want it to do. _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
