Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #4 by gpermus: (No comment was entered for this change.) Issue attribute updates: Status: Verified -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
On Friday 31 August 2007 13:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #2 by hanwenn: Hi Joe, can you review my patch for this fix? My preferred way for dealing with these cyclic dependency issues is to mark something cross-staff. If a grob has the cross-staff property set to true, it gets ignored for all pure-height calculations, so it's a good way to break this sort of cycle (plus, it's encapsulated in its own grob property). This issue looks particularly hairy, though. The natural thing would be to mark the TextScript cross-staff, since it has a cross-staff Script in its support. However, the Script isn't in its support yet when cross-staff gets checked because getting the Script direction in Script_column::order_grobs triggers Stem direction, which triggers the pure-height calculations. Maybe it would be better to mark a script-interface grob as cross-staff whenever it has another cross-staff script in the same ScriptColumn. Of course, that's a recursive definition, but it can probably be made to work. Anyway, it's too late for me to think about it properly now. In general, though, it would be nice if we could do this with the cross-staff property instead of adding code to a not-really-related callback. Joe ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
2007/8/31, Joe Neeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 31 August 2007 13:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #2 by hanwenn: Hi Joe, can you review my patch for this fix? My preferred way for dealing with these cyclic dependency issues is to mark something cross-staff. If a grob has the cross-staff property set to true, it gets ignored for all pure-height calculations, so it's a good way to break this sort of cycle (plus, it's encapsulated in its own grob property). Yes, but wouldn't this result in staves colliding if the script is really large? The advantage of doing it with Stem direction is that you break the cycle at the exact point where unnecessary information is requested. Of course, it would be best if we could have that idea encapsulated in a property by itself. One extreme idea could be to calculate up and down extents separately, perhaps with a Y-extent - (up-extent , down-extent) dependency, which we would have just for Stem for now. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Re: Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
On Saturday 01 September 2007 00:35, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: 2007/8/31, Joe Neeman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 31 August 2007 13:23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #2 by hanwenn: Hi Joe, can you review my patch for this fix? My preferred way for dealing with these cyclic dependency issues is to mark something cross-staff. If a grob has the cross-staff property set to true, it gets ignored for all pure-height calculations, so it's a good way to break this sort of cycle (plus, it's encapsulated in its own grob property). Yes, but wouldn't this result in staves colliding if the script is really large? The advantage of doing it with Stem direction is that you break the cycle at the exact point where unnecessary information is requested. Yeah, good point. Of course, it would be best if we could have that idea encapsulated in a property by itself. One extreme idea could be to calculate up and down extents separately, perhaps with a Y-extent - (up-extent , down-extent) dependency, which we would have just for Stem for now. That's an intriguing idea, but I think we can keep it on the back burner just in case we need it in the future. Joe ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with
down-articulation)
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430
New issue report by trevorbaca:
This one was really, really nasty to find.
In the following snippet we need the whole witches' brew of settings to
cause the bug (but it's quite repeatable). Specifically, the combination of
BOTH the down-markup AND the down-articulation TOGETHER WITH the
staff-changing note causes stemming and beaming to completely screw up.
Commenting out EITHER the down-markup OR the down-articulation OR BOTH
causes the stemming and beaming to work perfectly.
Bug shows up in both .29 and .30 but I haven't tested earlier builds to see
when exactly it entered.
%%% BEGIN %%%
\version 2.11.30
\new PianoStaff
\new Staff = RH {
\time 1/4
c''16 [
c''16
\change Staff = LH
c''16 \tenuto _ \markup { foo }
\change Staff = RH
c''16 ]
}
\new Staff = LH {
s4
}
%%% END %%%
Really nasty is some heavily \markup-ed piano music.
Attachments:
stemming-and-beaming-craziness.png 10.2 KB
Issue attributes:
Status: New
Owner:
Labels: Type-Defect Priority-Medium
--
You received this message because you are listed in the owner
or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue.
You may adjust your issue notification preferences at:
http://code.google.com/hosting/settings
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #1 by hanwenn: Joe, can you have a look? I'm not very familiar with this code anymore. It seems that the Y alignment of the staves ends up trigger Stem::height, which enters beam formatting. Beam formatting for a cross staff beam needs Y-alignment of the staves, of course. One solution I can see, is to remove the Stem from the script support when it is opposite of the script; this is a bit hackish, as I'm specialcasing in Site_position_interface, but it breaks the cyclic dependency. Issue attribute updates: Status: Accepted Owner: joeneeman -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #2 by hanwenn: Hi Joe, can you review my patch for this fix? Issue attribute updates: Labels: fixed_2_11_32 -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)
Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation) http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430 Comment #3 by hanwenn: (No comment was entered for this change.) Issue attribute updates: Status: Fixed -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings ___ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
