Hi David, hi all, On 2017-02-19 15:58, David Kastrup wrote: > Michael Gerdau <m...@qata.de> writes: > >> Am 18.02.2017 um 21:15 schrieb Alexander Kobel: >>> [Bug report summary:] >>> >>> Extenders are not drawn anymore for melismata that include notes that >>> are not bar-aligned, starting somewhere between 2.19.50 and 2.19.55. >>> M(N)WE attached - the first and second score should have extenders until >>> the last note. >> >> I've tried this on 2.19.50 - 2.19.55 and it seems as if it used to work >> until 2.19.54, i.e. apparently it is a 2.19.55 regression (which kind of >> explains why I had not seen this problem before :) ) >> >> The first example has an extender only because the default minimum >> length is 1.5. if that is reduced to 0 that extender vanishes altogether >> in 2.19.55. > > This is a consequence of > > commit 6c6d1f6ac9e6a7a9aba760dcbb41b4fbbc8f0536 > Author: David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> > Date: Sat Feb 4 14:43:47 2017 +0100 > > Issue 5053/2: Fix extendersOverRests property > > This previously behaved as always-on.
Argh, sure. Should have thought about that after the earlier, similar report from 2017-02-15... > This program part now works as intended. Unfortunately, > extendersOverRests appears to be a misnomed property, so the resulting > effective change from extendersOverRest being interpreted as ##t > regardless of its setting to having it default to ##f affects more than > extenders over rests. Not sure about the original intention. I see the point for having the choice to stop extenders over rests (as the documentation suggests). The "side effects" are hardly what I expect, and I don't immediately see a use for that. > Maybe one should let the setting default to ##t for now and try matching > its documentation to its behavior before changing the default back to > ##f. +1. Right now, the cure seems to do more harm than good, at least from a user's point of view... Concerning "matching doc to behavior": do you intend to change rather docs, behavior, or both? On a somewhat, but not quite, unrelated note, concerning https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4509/ and https://codereview.appspot.com/313240043: Do you want/need any input there, or are you merely keeping a log of your pondering? I feel somewhat involved as Knut's and your "Rietveld proxy", but I'm not sure whether or how I can assist. (Note: I don't intend to push by any means; I've got a wagonload of way more important things to deal with these days...) Cheers, Alexander _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
