Re: Issue 430 in lilypond: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with down-articulation)

[Joe Neeman]

On Saturday 01 September 2007 00:35, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> 2007/8/31, Joe Neeman <address@hidden>:
> > On Friday 31 August 2007 13:23, address@hidden wrote:
> > > Issue 430: Cross-staff beam craziness (when down-markup combines with
> > > down-articulation)
> > > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=430
> > >
> > > Comment #2 by hanwenn:
> > > Hi Joe,
> > >
> > > can you review my patch for this fix?
> >
> > My preferred way for dealing with these cyclic dependency issues is to
> > mark something cross-staff. If a grob has the cross-staff property set to
> > true, it gets ignored for all pure-height calculations, so it's a good
> > way to break this sort of cycle (plus, it's encapsulated in its own grob
> > property).
>
> Yes, but wouldn't this result in staves colliding if the script is
> really large?  The advantage of doing it with Stem direction is that
> you break the cycle at the exact point where unnecessary information
> is requested.

Yeah, good point.

> Of course, it would be best if we could have that idea 
> encapsulated in a property by itself.  One extreme idea could be to
> calculate up and down extents separately, perhaps with a
>
>   Y-extent -> (up-extent  , down-extent)
>
> dependency, which we would have just for Stem for now.

That's an intriguing idea, but I think we can keep it on the back burner just 
in case we need it in the future.

Joe