On Aug 11, 2011, at 4:48 PM, [email protected] wrote: > Regtest missing. > > Much better now, but with my example there are still some > inconsistencies. In particular, the ordering of the six footnotes in > each of the systems is: > > 1st system: > 2 3 5 > 1 4 6 > > 2nd system (start at 7, shown here as 1): > 1 4 5 > 2 3 6 > > 3rd system (2nd page): > 1 3 5 > 2 4 6 > > So, while the numbers are now sorted by moment, two footnotes at the > same moment are not consistently ordered. >
I've put a new patchset up that should do the trick. Before I add a regtest, I want to figure out why your example intersects with the footnotes - that may be a separate bug that I can fix in this patch. Cheers, MS _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
