Allows glissandi to be continuous at line breaks

Allows glissandi to be continuous at line breaks

[MikeSol, 2011-03-23 00:37:07]

I'm using this is in a piece I'm working on and figured it may be useful in
LilyPond.  Let me know what you think!

[Colin Campbell, 2011-03-28 01:53:27]

On 2011/03/23 00:37:07, MikeSol wrote:
> I'm using this is in a piece I'm working on and figured it may be useful in
> LilyPond.  Let me know what you think!

Mike, is this related to issue 663? If not, 'll open an issue to track it as an
enhancement.

[mike_apollinemike.com, 2011-03-28 02:26:40]

On Mar 27, 2011, at 9:53 PM, ColinPKCampbell@gmail.com wrote:

> On 2011/03/23 00:37:07, MikeSol wrote:
>> I'm using this is in a piece I'm working on and figured it may be
> useful in
>> LilyPond.  Let me know what you think!
> 
> Mike, is this related to issue 663? If not, 'll open an issue to track
> it as an enhancement.

It's not related to 663 (I think 663 can be closed...glissandi now are breakable
over line breaks, no?).  It should get its own issue, then.  Thanks!

Cheers,
Mike

[cpkc_shaw.ca, 2011-03-28 03:20:03]

On 11-03-27 08:26 PM, mike@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2011, at 9:53 PM, ColinPKCampbell@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On 2011/03/23 00:37:07, MikeSol wrote:
>>> I'm using this is in a piece I'm working on and figured it may be
>> useful in
>>> LilyPond.  Let me know what you think!
>> Mike, is this related to issue 663? If not, 'll open an issue to track
>> it as an enhancement.
> It's not related to 663 (I think 663 can be closed...glissandi now are
breakable over line breaks, no?).  It should get its own issue, then.  Thanks!
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
> _______________________________________________

Done, Mike, as issue 1578.  Also, a small favour (from *all* developers, 
too!): I'm trying to give Graham a hand by running the basic tests on 
new patches, and it would be really helpful if you could let me know 
whether your patches are applied to existing issues, or if they are new 
and unrelated.  There is a big problem with the issue tracker not 
handling patches and reitveld sucking hugely for tracking issues, so I'm 
trying to keep them in synch, hoping that issues are kept visible and 
patches don't get overlooked.  Perhaps you could just mention an issue 
number in the subject of your reitveld posting, or call it "New feature: 
foo the baz bars" when you are doing new stuff?

You are the most productive developer lately, and I'd like to avoid 
bogging you and the other developers down in bureaucracy, so if you can 
give me the hints, I'll look after tying things together for you.

Thanks, Mike
Colin

-- 
The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance
of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who
have too little.
-Franklin D. Roosevelt, 32nd US President (1882-1945)

[Graham Percival (old account), 2011-03-28 14:08:52]

LGTM

[mike_apollinemike.com, 2011-03-28 15:09:53]

On Mar 28, 2011, at 10:08 AM, percival.music.ca@gmail.com wrote:

> LGTM

Pushed.
94860164493ab3a209986b0e3662ff7bd8958cb5

Cheers,
MS

[Neil Puttock, 2011-03-28 19:27:09]

Hi Mike,

Can you add a regression test for this please?

BTW, I've just done a quick test with this snippet pair; don't you think they
look a bit weird?

\version "2.13.56"

% heavily damped at both broken bounds
\score {
  \relative c' {
    \override Glissando #'after-line-breaking = ##t
    \override Glissando #'breakable = ##t
    c1\glissando
    \break
    c'1
  }
  \layout {
    ragged-right = ##t
  }
}

% overshoots and swoops back down at left broken bound
\score {
  \relative c' {
    \override Glissando #'after-line-breaking = ##t
    \override Glissando #'breakable = ##t
    c1\glissando
    \break
    c'1
  }
}

[mike_apollinemike.com, 2011-03-28 20:02:32]

On Mar 28, 2011, at 3:27 PM, n.puttock@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi Mike,
> 
> Can you add a regression test for this please?
> 
> BTW, I've just done a quick test with this snippet pair; don't you think
> they look a bit weird?
> 
> \version "2.13.56"
> 
> % heavily damped at both broken bounds
> \score {
>  \relative c' {
>    \override Glissando #'after-line-breaking = ##t
>    \override Glissando #'breakable = ##t
>    c1\glissando
>    \break
>    c'1
>  }
>  \layout {
>    ragged-right = ##t
>  }
> }
> 
> % overshoots and swoops back down at left broken bound
> \score {
>  \relative c' {
>    \override Glissando #'after-line-breaking = ##t
>    \override Glissando #'breakable = ##t
>    c1\glissando
>    \break
>    c'1
>  }
> }


I'll make this the regression test.  Neil - you have a knack for finding the
cases that break all of my work!  The piece I made w/ this code looks fine.

Back to the drawing board, & sorry for the premature push: it passed all the
regtests & looked fine in my music.  I'll have it fixed by tonight.

Just a quick note - if you move all of the normalized-endpoint stuff to the end
of the code, it avoids this problem, although it is still not exact.

Cheers,
MS