Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Nathan Chou]

> \new Staff { << { g\=Staff.1( a b } >> << { c,\newCommand d e\=Staff.1) } >> }
> Without the command indicating the slur's change in voice, the d and e
> would not be acknowledged by the slur, since it would still belong to
> the voice it started in.

Correction: the c and d would not be acknowledged. Sorry for the noise.

Nathan

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Nathan Chou]

Hello,

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Trevor Daniels  wrote:
> You're now a developer AFA SourceForge is concerned, which means you can add 
> Issues.  There are a few more hoops to jump through before you can submit 
> patches.

I have uploaded the patch, thanks.


Having worked on cross-voice slurs and discussed ties with Jan-Peter,
I am considering adding a new command (not yet sure what the exact
syntax should be) that sets a spanner's current voice. Currently, when
a cross-voice spanner starts, it remains in the same voice (i.e. is
handled by the same engraver instance) until the stop event occurs.
However, there are situations where the spanner needs to change voices
before the stop event, which the new command would achieve.

For example:
{ g\=Staff.1~ << g\newCommand \\ g >> }
The command indicates that the tie's voice changes to the top voice,
where the tie ends upon seeing the g. In this case, another
alternative could be to add a tie stop event.

\new Staff { << { g\=Staff.1( a b } >> << { c,\newCommand d e\=Staff.1) } >> }
Without the command indicating the slur's change in voice, the d and e
would not be acknowledged by the slur, since it would still belong to
the voice it started in.

Does this seem reasonable?

Nathan

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Trevor Daniels]

Nathan, you wrote Tuesday, July 19, 2016 10:03 PM

> Can you please add my account starrynte (email address is 
> starry...@gmail.com)?

You're now a developer AFA SourceForge is concerned, which means you can add 
Issues.  There are a few more hoops to jump through before you can submit 
patches.  Details are in 

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor/summary-for-experienced-developers

and

http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor/git_002dcl

Trevor
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Nathan Chou]

Thank you Simon, Phil, Trevor for the advice

On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 3:20 AM, Phil Holmes  wrote:
> AFAICS you don't have permission yet to create issues on Allura.  If you
> create a SourceForge account and request permission for that account on this
> mailing list, Trevor or I will add you to the contributors.

Can you please add my account starrynte (email address is starry...@gmail.com)?

Nathan

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Trevor Daniels]

Nathan Chou wrote Tuesday, July 19, 2016 10:26 AM

> I have (except for one question below) finished adapting
> Dynamic_engraver and Dynamic_align_engraver to work cross-voice. I
> plan to continue with other spanners (perhaps slurs next), but I want
> to make sure I am on the right track. I organized my current progress
> in the gsoc-2016-spanners branch on my GitHub fork (
> https://github.com/starrynte/lilypond/compare/master...gsoc-2016-spanners
> ); any feedback would be welcome.

Congratulations and thanks for all the work you've done so far!
 
> Should I create an issue and upload
> what I currently have (working cross-voice support for dynamics) to
> Rietveld for code review? Or should I leave that for the end when the
> project is completed?

Create an issue and upload what you have done so far as soon as it is
operational.  That way it will receive a review and, once installed in
a development release, attract user comments which will help you in
your further work.

Trevor
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Phil Holmes]

- Original Message - 
From: "Nathan Chou" <starry...@gmail.com>

To: <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 10:26 AM
Subject: GSoC spanners review/update



Hello,

I have (except for one question below) finished adapting
Dynamic_engraver and Dynamic_align_engraver to work cross-voice. I
plan to continue with other spanners (perhaps slurs next), but I want
to make sure I am on the right track. I organized my current progress
in the gsoc-2016-spanners branch on my GitHub fork (
https://github.com/starrynte/lilypond/compare/master...gsoc-2016-spanners
); any feedback would be welcome. Should I create an issue and upload
what I currently have (working cross-voice support for dynamics) to
Rietveld for code review? Or should I leave that for the end when the
project is completed?



I would suggest you create an issue and upload a patch to Rietveld once you 
have a body of working, self contained code.  Doing the entire project in 
stages like this will make for better review and less chance of problems 
with incorporating it in the master code.


AFAICS you don't have permission yet to create issues on Allura.  If you 
create a SourceForge account and request permission for that account on this 
mailing list, Trevor or I will add you to the contributors.


--
Phil Holmes 



___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: GSoC spanners review/update

[Simon Albrecht]

On 19.07.2016 11:26, Nathan Chou wrote:

My other question regards the footnote-spanner acknowledger in
Dynamic_align_engraver, which calls Axis_group_interface::add_element
to add footnote spanners for dynamics to the DynamicLineSpanner. In
what situation is this is actually needed?


Well, I guess DynamicLineSpanner as an invisible, ‘meta’ object is 
unlikely to be targeted with footnotes. They will always refer to 
individual dynamics, I think.


Best, Simon

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

GSoC spanners review/update

[Nathan Chou]

Hello,

I have (except for one question below) finished adapting
Dynamic_engraver and Dynamic_align_engraver to work cross-voice. I
plan to continue with other spanners (perhaps slurs next), but I want
to make sure I am on the right track. I organized my current progress
in the gsoc-2016-spanners branch on my GitHub fork (
https://github.com/starrynte/lilypond/compare/master...gsoc-2016-spanners
); any feedback would be welcome. Should I create an issue and upload
what I currently have (working cross-voice support for dynamics) to
Rietveld for code review? Or should I leave that for the end when the
project is completed?

My other question regards the footnote-spanner acknowledger in
Dynamic_align_engraver, which calls Axis_group_interface::add_element
to add footnote spanners for dynamics to the DynamicLineSpanner. In
what situation is this is actually needed? I removed the
footnote-spanner acknowledger and the reg-tests still passed, and I
couldn't come up with an example where the output differed, even after
adding Footnote_engraver to the voice context.

Thanks again for everyone's help!

Nathan

___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel