Looks good to me. The regtest changes look like improvements, although I wonder if the time-signature and repeat dots should simply center around the line closest to zero. If a user sets his line-positions entirely below zero, he might /want/ the time-signature above his staff lines. Why else would he set his line-positions below zero, when he will be using a non-standard clef placement anyway ?
http://codereview.appspot.com/6211047/diff/6001/lily/breathing-sign.cc File lily/breathing-sign.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6211047/diff/6001/lily/breathing-sign.cc#newcode86 lily/breathing-sign.cc:86: for (Direction i = DOWN; Somebody recently standardized these loops to use a macro, for(UP_and_DOWN(i)), issue 2491, so use that macro. http://codereview.appspot.com/6211047/diff/6001/lily/time-signature.cc File lily/time-signature.cc (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6211047/diff/6001/lily/time-signature.cc#newcode77 lily/time-signature.cc:77: --it; The STL makes code very easy to read, doesn't it? Without it, we would have to write: Real mid = staff->staff_span().center(); Real closest = linepos[0]; for (int i=0; i<linepos.size(); i++) if (fabs(linepos[i] - mid) < fabs(closest - mid)) closest = linepos[i]; http://codereview.appspot.com/6211047/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
