[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine

From: Joe Neeman
Subject: Re: RFC: new vertical layout engine
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 12:38:09 -0700

On Sun, 2009-07-26 at 20:02 +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> Hi Joe,
> 2009/7/26 Joe Neeman <address@hidden>:
> > Please do send me the files. But first, check to see if they give the
> > same behaviour with current git. I pushed some changes yesterday that
> > may have helped.
> Have you carried these changes over from dev/jneeman?
No, the changes I recently committed to master were a few small things
that I thought were safe.

>   The reason I
> ask is that I'm now getting the same assertion failure on a particular
> file (using --disable-optimising) with both branches:
> lilypond: Real Simple_spacer::compress_line():
> Assertion `fabs (configuration_length (cur_force) - cur_len) < 1e-6'
> failed.
> I can send you the file if you'd like to take a look at it.


> I've tested a few examples of piano music, and apart from the spacing
> between staves being very tight, I'm encountering some strange issues
> associated with cross-staff beaming; sometimes they force the staves
> apart, other times (mainly associated with existing cross-staff
> beaming bugs) they trigger a collision with the next system.

Could you please send me some examples?

> When I set fixed distances using alignment-distances, I find that
> systems with three staves sometimes break the page breaking algorithm:
> systems spill off the bottom of the page, when it would be much better
> to move one on to the next page.

This must be because I'm not using alignment-distances in the
page-breaking stage, but only in the layout stage; I know how to fix
this one.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]