Re: Ties and slurs going into repeat alternatives

[David Kastrup]

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 6:19 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>>>> Is there a routine that does most of the cloning business so that it is
>>>> reasonably easy to fix the behavior of \repeat volta?
>>>
>>> The problem is that the 2nd slur needs to be wired to other
>>> noteheads/stems/etc. for the formatting to come out correctly, while
>>> around linebreaks, all of the rewiring can be done generically.
>>
>> I am not sure I understand.  For all but the first repeat alternative
>> (which would retain the current behavior), the alternative _is_ detached
>> from the common repeat part.  So it would appear that the situation is
>> quite comparable to a linebreak.
>
> No, it's not comparable. The slur engraver generates one big slur that
> encompasses all notes; after line breaking, a routine generates a copy
> and trims all grob pointers (including the note head ones) that are
> not in the same system as the copied slur.

I suppose this has the potential to become another case where you
explain the same thing over and over to me and I don't get it.

> The correct solution would be to hack the appropriate engravers to
> remember the state at the start of the alternative and recreate that
> at the following alternatives.  That would be very hairy though.

How much state from before the first alternative would actually remain
after trimming all grob pointers from the first alternative (which get
replaced by the different alternative) as well as those from the common
repeat part (which are the equivalent of "line above")?

Probably not much more than slur orientation and possibly system entry
position?

For ties, the situation should be rather simple: one just needs to
trigger \repeatTie automatically, possibly retaining orientation.

-- 
David Kastrup