On 22 déc. 2012, at 07:43, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote: > > https://codereview.appspot.com/6827072/diff/34001/lily/axis-group-interface.cc > File lily/axis-group-interface.cc (right): > > https://codereview.appspot.com/6827072/diff/34001/lily/axis-group-interface.cc#newcode62 > lily/axis-group-interface.cc:62: return SCM_BOOL_T; > Now the whole note-column is marked cross-staff if its stem spans > staves. Check if Note_column::cross_staff_extent() still makes sense
It does, because this function is a replacement for Grob::extent for NoteColumns. Axis_group_interface::height, even in unpure, won't take cross-staff stems into account. Here we want to do this, so we use the more accurate Note_column::cross_staff_extent. It is a strange exception, tho...it's worth trying to get rid of it one day. > > https://codereview.appspot.com/6827072/diff/34001/lily/axis-group-interface.cc#newcode258 > lily/axis-group-interface.cc:258: continue; > This might now ignore protruding note-heads under a cross-staff beam > when estimating system heights for page breaking. > Added a line of code to make sure this doesn't happen. The regtests checked out clean last time I checked, so if this code inadvertently causes NoteColumns to be ignored when they shouldn't be (experience dictates that someone will find something somewhere that doesn't work), it'll likely be an easy fix. A git grep of cross-staff confirms this - there are no circumstances I can see (aside those you've identified) where NoteColumns' will by unduly excluded because of their cross-staffitude. Cheers, MS _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
