Re: PATCH: Refactor script-column.cc for improved reading and fewer lines

[Trevor Daniels]

Carl Sorensen wrote Saturday, December 05, 2009 2:38 PM
> On 12/5/09 2:56 AM, "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> 
> wrote:
> > Carl Sorensen wrote Friday, December 04, 2009 6:53 PM
> > > Take three text_scripts, all with outside_staff_priority of 450,
> > > and with
> > > script_priorities of 201, 202, 203.
> > >
> > > Convert them to three text_scripts with outside_staff_priorities
> > > of 450,
> > > 451, 452, so that the script_priority is moved to outside_staff
> > > priority.
> >
> > What would happen if there was a TextScript at the same
> > moment with an 'outside-staff-priority of 451, set by
> > the user?
>
> The only way to have a TextScript at the same moment with an
> 'outside-staff-priority of 451 is to use \tweak for the particular
> 'outside-staff-priority, e.g.
>
> c4^"1"^"2"\tweak #'outside-staff-priority #451 ^"3"

No, if you have multiple voices in one staff the 
'outside-staff-priorities
can be \overridden independently at the same time in the several 
voices.

> A look at your table in the learning manual shows that the 
> different
> outside-staff-priority values vary by 50.  So if we had 51 
> TextScripts, then
> the outside-staff-priority would have an issue.  But if we had 51
> TextScripts, then I'm fairly certain that there would be lots of 
> issues.

Indeed.  But at least there is plenty of headroom with a gap of 50.

> But in the interest of the simplest code that provides the desired
> functionality, I've changed the code to have the 
> outside-staff-priorities in
> the above example be 450, 450.1, 450.2.

I think this is much better.  I can easily imagine a user
changing the outside-staff-priority by one to change the
stacking order.  Changing it by 0.1 seems far less likely
to me.  It also makes it easier to document clearly, if we
think it necessary.

> Of course, the question could now be phrased "What happens if a 
> user set an
> 'outside-staff-priority of 450.2?"

Well, I sha'n't ask that ;)

Thanks, Trevor