Re: Potential fix for issue 1504. (issue4237057)

[hanwenn]

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/1/lily/spanner.cc
File lily/spanner.cc (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/1/lily/spanner.cc#newcode405
lily/spanner.cc:405: Spanner::broken_spanner_index (Spanner const *sp)
On 2011/03/12 10:18:06, MikeSol wrote:
> On 2011/03/09 23:03:44, hanwenn wrote:
> > why not make it a real member funtcion?

> Actually - sorry, I spoke too soon.  I see that there's a function
> get_break_index.  Could these two functions be merged?  Is there a
reason that
> the two functions exist separately?  If not, I'll merge them together.

good point. Can you replace broken_spanner_index by get_break_index
everywhere?  should be separate commit to go in before this one.  If it
passes the regtest cleanly, does not need to be reviewed.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc
File lily/beam.cc (right):

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc#newcode144
lily/beam.cc:144: Beam::get_beam_span (Spanner* me)
Why can't you use spanner::spanner_length()?  these numbers don't need
to be that exact, do they?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc#newcode160
lily/beam.cc:160: extract_grob_set (me, "stems", stems);
you already have them.  line 145. In this case you might as well use
get_bound() rather than the stems, btw.

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc#newcode169
lily/beam.cc:169: Beam::get_span_data (Spanner *me)
_data -> _widths ?

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc#newcode171
lily/beam.cc:171:
drop

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc#newcode634
lily/beam.cc:634: if (Spanner::broken_spanner_index (me) == (int)i)
use newstyle casting int(i)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/diff/8001/lily/beam.cc#newcode646
lily/beam.cc:646: }
how about you store this in a property? You could compute the property
in a separate function, say

  feather-fractions pair?  "how much of feathering for this beam"

and the computation would only need to be done once.

1st beam gets:  (0.0 . 0.25)
2nd: (0.25 . 0.75)
3rd: (0.75 . 1.0)

(assuming total beam length of 2x linesize).

then print() only needs to do the part for its own system.

unfeathered beams get (1.0 . 1.0) and shrinking beams (1.0 . 0.0)

http://codereview.appspot.com/4237057/