[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Two conflicting text spanners
From: |
David Nalesnik |
Subject: |
Re: Two conflicting text spanners |
Date: |
Tue, 9 Jan 2018 10:58:31 -0600 |
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 10:31 AM, Kieren MacMillan
<address@hidden> wrote:
> Hi Neo,
>
>> I was afraid that without any instructions the code in that thread would
>> fail,
>> but to my surprise it worked beautifully! Thank you!
>
> You're welcome. From what I understand, the code has some issues, but it
> seemed like it would solve your use case.
>
>> I wonder why this isn't coded into LP itself or provided as a snippet
>> with the software or in some repository (or am I mistaken?)
>
> As far as I know, you're not mistaken: it's not in the codebase, nor provided
> as a snippet. I would imagine the limitations (see the email thread) are a
> sufficient obstacle to the functionality being considered for the main
> codebase…
I'm sure there is a bug somewhere, but the problem reported in the
thread was solved later in the thread :)
and even if not, the path to getting a patch created, submitted,
reviewed, and accepted can be long and steep, and perhaps David N has
higher-priority ways he is applying his Lilypond-based time at the
moment.
>
> I believe there is general agreement that all spanners should support ids,
> but there are evidently technical hurdles to making this happen.
>
My goal for the semester break is to get my measure-attached spanner
patch submitted. I've been sitting on it for far too long. With the
simultaneous spanners I'm not sure how I ought to proceed. I thought
there was some GSoC work on spanner-ids, so I hesitate to work this
into the C++ code (as Thomas Morley proposed) and interfere somehow or
contribute something with very limited shelf life. Really, I don't
know. Does anyone know more about this subject?
David