Add StaffAxis context type

Add StaffAxis context type

See the regression test for more info.

[pkx166h, 2015-08-27 10:28:48]

Passes make, make check and a full make doc.

reg test diff here:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6OEJuOXRpNE56YkE

PATCH_REVIEW

[pkx166h, 2015-08-27 10:31:55]

On 2015/08/27 10:28:48, J_lowe wrote:
> Passes make, make check and a full make doc.
> 
> reg test diff here:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6OEJuOXRpNE56YkE
> 
> PATCH_REVIEW

and second reg test here

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6cFpVNDRsbThZX1U

[dak, 2015-08-27 11:33:18]

pkx166h@gmail.com writes:

> On 2015/08/27 10:28:48, J_lowe wrote:
>> Passes make, make check and a full make doc.
>
>> reg test diff here:
>
>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6OEJuOXRpNE56YkE
>
>> PATCH_REVIEW
>
> and second reg test here
>
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6cFpVNDRsbThZX1U
>
> https://codereview.appspot.com/265730043/

That does not look good.  The mere existence of StaffAxis should not
lead to such results.  I'll investigate.

-- 
David Kastrup

[bealingsplayfordnews, 2015-08-27 11:33:36]

On 2015/08/27 10:31:55, J_lowe wrote:
> On 2015/08/27 10:28:48, J_lowe wrote:
> > Passes make, make check and a full make doc.
> > 
> > reg test diff here:
> > 
> > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6OEJuOXRpNE56YkE
> > 
> > PATCH_REVIEW
> 
> and second reg test here
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6cFpVNDRsbThZX1U

Looks like the regtests have revealed a problem with the current patch.

[dak, 2015-08-27 11:55:40]

On 2015/08/27 11:33:18, dak wrote:
> mailto:pkx166h@gmail.com writes:
> 
> > On 2015/08/27 10:28:48, J_lowe wrote:
> >> Passes make, make check and a full make doc.
> >
> >> reg test diff here:
> >
> >> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6OEJuOXRpNE56YkE
> >
> >> PATCH_REVIEW
> >
> > and second reg test here
> >
> > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9nZ5LHV2Ds6cFpVNDRsbThZX1U
> >
> > https://codereview.appspot.com/265730043/
> 
> That does not look good.  The mere existence of StaffAxis should not
> lead to such results.  I'll investigate.
> 
> -- 
> David Kastrup

Well, the regtests are awful.  They use \new Dynamics at top level, but Score
does not accept Dynamics.  So the regtests make do by creating a PianoStaff for
the Dynamics.  After the patch, they use StaffAxis spontaneously instead of
PianoStaff.  Neither makes any sense.  I'm still fuzzy on why this leads to
different spacing.  An obvious "fix" would be not to have StaffAxis accept a
Dynamics context.  But that does not sound like an improvement.  It seems saner
to see whether accepting Dynamics at Score level would be a better idea.

[dak, 2015-08-28 15:51:35]

s/StaffAxis/OneStaff/ and improve example

[pkx166h, 2015-08-29 08:22:10]

Passes make, make check and a full make doc.

PATCH_REIVEW