Comment #30 on issue 3385 by [email protected]: Ottava with
cross-staff messes up beams
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3385
For me, conceptually, 3199 is a good idea. It articulates all
relationships unpure-pure through the same mechanism instead of using
series of lists. This reduces the complexity of the code base and allows
for easier extensibility and flexibility.
If the approach itself is unsound or buggy, then I would be for reverting
it as well. But I think 3199 is a good design decision that is revealing
problematic designs elsewhere. My main question is: how did this patch
cause issue 3385?
What may be worth it is to revert the patch for 3199 and commit it in many
passes - one for each pure property being rearticulated in a pure-unpure
container in define-grobs.scm. My initial counting says that this would
represent 31 separate commits plus an initial commit with the C++ code.
That way, we can isolate the problematic container and treat it separately.
--
You received this message because this project is configured to send all
issue notifications to this address.
You may adjust your notification preferences at:
https://code.google.com/hosting/settings
