Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement text annotation, inherits from Text #2687

Closed
wants to merge 8 commits into from

Conversation

rragrawal
Copy link
Contributor

This branch implements an alternative approach, where text annotation inherits from Text rather than Element.

@MarcSabatella
Copy link
Contributor

Need to remove the include of annotation.h from segment.cpp and scoreview.cpp

@@ -376,6 +376,7 @@ class Score : public QObject, public ScoreElement {
QString _layerTagComments[32];
QList<Layer> _layer;
int _currentLayer { 0 };
int _isAnnotation { 0 };
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't see a reason why this shouldn't be done the same as all other similar tester functions - see element.h, the CONVERT macros.

Actually, I take that back. I don't understand this at all. You are defining an annotation to be an entire score?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@rragrawal rragrawal Jun 28, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, I'm just setting a flag for the paintevent to check if a box has to be drawn. It could rather have been called "hasAnnotation". See my comment below.

@rragrawal
Copy link
Contributor Author

rragrawal commented Jun 28, 2016

To add a hard coded box to the score, select a note, Add->Annotation->RangeAnnotation.

@Jojo-Schmitz
Copy link
Contributor

rebase needed

@rragrawal
Copy link
Contributor Author

The branch RangeAnnotation1 includes these commits as well

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 8:03 PM, Joachim Schmitz notifications@github.com
wrote:

rebase needed


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#2687 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AGf7ytALQGdfM4FyEkGA4Yo-nYu72CHBks5qS7y1gaJpZM4I7zZq
.

Ruchit Agrawal.
IIIT Hyderabad.

@Jojo-Schmitz
Copy link
Contributor

You mean #2714, right?

@rragrawal
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, wonder why the check is failing though.

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Joachim Schmitz notifications@github.com
wrote:

You mean #2714 #2714, right?


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#2687 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AGf7yisSRDCpQ64Ik7FxmP0WP9HSwMayks5qTeldgaJpZM4I7zZq
.

Ruchit Agrawal.
IIIT Hyderabad.

@Jojo-Schmitz
Copy link
Contributor

because there have been some changes to the same code since?

@rragrawal
Copy link
Contributor Author

yes, i guess, I shall rebase

On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Joachim Schmitz notifications@github.com
wrote:

because there have been some changes to the same code since?


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#2687 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AGf7yh8eB9CO-0qkbkNJIACggWg1NAZUks5qT64cgaJpZM4I7zZq
.

Ruchit Agrawal.
IIIT Hyderabad.

@lasconic
Copy link
Contributor

See #2783

@lasconic lasconic closed this Aug 15, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants