lilypond-devel
[Top][All Lists]

## Re: 2.15.8 Regtests

 From: Phil Holmes Subject: Re: 2.15.8 Regtests Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2011 15:11:28 +0100

----- Original Message ----- From: "David Kastrup" <address@hidden>
```To: <address@hidden>
Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: 2.15.8 Regtests

```
```"Phil Holmes" <address@hidden> writes:

```
```One major change from 2.15.7 - in nested-property-revert.ly.  I'm
assuming this is down to David's reversion of an earlier commit.  I'm
not expert enough to say what should happen here, although it doesn't
look right to me.
```
```
It's work in progress, I am afraid.  If you take a look at the source
code, you'll see that it is quite dubious:

\version "2.14.0"

texidoc = "
If a nested property revert follows an override in the same grob for
a different property, the nested property's default setting should not
be evicted from the property alist.
"
}

\relative c' {
c1\startTrillSpan
c1\stopTrillSpan
\override TrillSpanner #'color =  #red
\revert TrillSpanner #'(bound-details left text)
c1\startTrillSpan
c1\stopTrillSpan
}

This "should not" is not achievable with the current data structures
without causing other regressions even harder to explain (which already
happened).  So I picked the less complex code and behavior as a starting
point for first fixing the data structures, then the code.

The test case is quite artificial and, in my opinion, not worth fixing
temporarily at the cost of breaking more straightforward code.

So this is work in progress.  I am on it, but currently I need to find
the source of a segmentation fault.  If we are lucky, it is the same
```
```
```
I think this needs to be added to the tracker, and would normally count as critical regression. I'm tempted to mark it regression - high - since it's only there because of another critical that you fixed (IIRC) and you are working on it. You OK with that?
```
--
Phil Holmes

```