Yeah, just checked it out, you can remove the spurious if (brain fart). I don’t have time to propose a patch today but I can do that on Monday if no one else can get around to it (I haven’t set up git-cl yet on this machine). Alternatively, I can just push the change to master if people are OK with that.
Cheers, ~Mike On 30 January 2017 at 14.23.02, David Kastrup (d...@gnu.org) wrote: Martin Strunz <mar...@aol.com> writes: > Hi, > > \lily\spanner.cc line 453: > > opposite conditions in nested if statement Interesting. I would have thought that something like this most likely comes about by two different people making patches at different times, but the whole passage appears to be from commit a339f8b9865b0f02febd351ba494129d414fb568 Author: Mike Solomon <m...@apollinemike.com> Date: Wed Mar 16 15:07:34 2011 -0400 Fixes Issue 1504, allowing feather beam line breaking. Makes it such that the degree of feathering at the end of a system is preserved at the beginning of the next system. Adds a normalized-endpoints property to Spanner, which calculates the portion of a spanner (normalized from 0 to 1) taken up by any broken child. It is not obvious to me at a cursory reading what the intent here was: the behavior in the never-reached "if (!orig->is_broken ())" branch is quite different from the code in the actually taken branch. So I am somewhat hesitant in throwing out the code that (right now) is never reached. Mike? Any idea what was the intent here and what the correct way to make it happen would be? -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
