[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnu-music-discuss] Re: Tie issues...
From: |
Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: |
[Gnu-music-discuss] Re: Tie issues... |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Sep 2000 18:18:42 +0200 (CEST) |
address@hidden writes:
> David Raleigh Arnold <address@hidden>
> >
> > It is important to be clear about what is necessary and what is not when
> > making up rules. :-)
> >
>
> I guess you and I have different rule books.
[snip]
Someone is making a too-large fuss over this. What you describe is
standard notation. Anyways:
--- local-key-engraver.cc~ Mon Jul 17 12:44:58 2000
+++ local-key-engraver.cc Mon Sep 11 18:16:48 2000
@@ -117,7 +117,15 @@
Side_position::add_support (key_item_p_,support_l);
}
- if (!forget)
+ /*
+ We should not record the accidental if it is the first
+ note and it is tied from the previous measure.
+
+ This also works, mostly, but will this always do the
+ correct thing?
+
+ */
+ if (!forget && !tie_changes)
{
/*
not really really correct if there are more than one
@@ -127,19 +135,6 @@
gh_int2scm (n)),
gh_int2scm (a));
-#if 0
- /*
- TESTME!
- */
- if (!tied_l_arr_.find_l (support_l))
- {
- local_key_.clear_internal_forceacc (note_l->pitch_);
- }
- else if (tie_changes)
- {
- local_key_.set_internal_forceacc (note_l->pitch_);
- }
-#endif
}
}
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys | address@hidden | http://www.cs.uu.nl/~hanwen/