Re: repeating bar numbers and rehearsal marks in frenched score

[Mark Knoop]

At 21:21 on 31 Jul 2016, David Kastrup wrote:
>Mark Knoop <address@hidden> writes:
>> OK. Attached are two patches and a test case. The patches are two
>> alternate methods of approaching the problem.
>>
>> Keep a staff alive with multiple layers
>> ---------------------------------------
>>
>> This changes the remove-layer property to number-or-pair? such that a
>> list of values can be specified. The layer will remain alive with any
>> other layer whose remove-layer value is in the list.
>
>If one can specify more than one remove-layer, what layer does a staff
>belong to?  If there is no longer numerical order, how are cycles
>avoided?

If remove-layer is a list, the staff is dependent only, and does not
participate in the layering decisions (as an empty list does
currently). It is only controlled by other layers.

>All in all, I am more sympathetic to the list approach (which looks
>more generic), it is just that I see a lot of potential for paradoxes
>or even hangs.  I may be wrong.

Yes, I think the list approach is the better way to go. By making
list-set layers only dependent, I don't see that any cyclic problems
can occur.

remove-layer settings:

- '(): staff always alive (default)
- #f: staff alive or dead according to its own keepAliveInterfaces
- integer: staff alive only if all lower layer staves are dead
- list: staff alive with any stave with an included remove-layer value

James, could you test this patch for review please? I will work on
documentation.

--
Mark Knoop

staves-alive-and-dead.ly
Description: Text Data

0001-Keep-a-staff-alive-with-multiple-layers.patch
Description: Text Data