bug-lilypond
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: 2.17.6: assertion failed with \glissando


From: Keith OHara
Subject: Re: 2.17.6: assertion failed with \glissando
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 05:08:52 +0000 (UTC)
User-agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)

Werner LEMBERG <wl <at> gnu.org> writes:

> This time I tried with current git (commit 436824b8):
> 
> >   ../flower/include/interval.hh:226:
> >     T Interval_t<T>::center() const [with T = double]:
> >     Assertion `!is_empty ()' failed.

> I'm on a GNU/Linux box, running `autogen.sh' with
> `--disable-optimising', and compiling with g++ 4.6.2.
> 

The released builds are not compiled this way, so no-one can reproduce your
bug without using Linux to create a debug-enabled build.  I would guess 
that readers of bug-lilypond are more interested in helping to record bugs 
that affect released builds (I am , at least).

If you are compiling yourself you can:

lily/line-spanner.cc
@@ -189,7 +189,9 @@ Line_spanner::calc_bound_info (SCM smob, Direction dir)
         {
-          y = me->get_bound (dir)->extent (common_y, Y_AXIS).center ();
+          Interval ii = me->get_bound (dir)->extent (common_y, Y_AXIS);
+          if (!ii.is_empty())
+            y = ii.center ();
           details = scm_acons (ly_symbol2scm ("common-Y"), common_y->self_scm (
         }


> BTW, here is a full backtrace (of the first 32 frames).

> #0  Interval_t<double>::center (this=0xbfff96ec) at ../flower/include/
interval.hh:226
> #1  0x082d9cdd in Note_head::get_stem_attachment (fm=0x8602ec8, key=...) at 
note-head.cc:181

Somehow, you got a misleading backtrace, because note-head.cc:180 tests the 
same condition as the assertion that you report as failed.




reply via email to

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