On 5/4/11 8:56 AM, "m...@apollinemike.com" <m...@apollinemike.com> wrote:
> On May 1, 2011, at 10:47 AM, mts...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Ran the regtests - had to make one change, but they are now squeaky >> clean. Confirmations would be appreciated! >> >> Cheers, >> Mike >> >> http://codereview.appspot.com/4426072/ > > After chatting a bit w/ Han-Wen, I'm pushing this for now. In the future, he > may implement a class to take care of this. For now, my solution works and > does not break any regtests. I have some ideas for how to optimize one of the > loops (at the expense of slightly more memory used), but I want to get this > version up and running to see if it is as functional as I think it is. > > beam-collision-large-object.ly can be modified via the addition of an > accidental to check for this behavior. Let me know if you want me to do this. Yes, please do. WE always want to keep regtests updated to check for fixed bugs. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
