fix #66061: corruption on new score with adjactent pairs of linked st… #2084
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
MarcSabatella
force-pushed
the
66061-adjacent-linked-parts-rest
branch
from
37f64f2
to
80401a3
Compare
|
Rather than rely on prinmaryStaff() - which doesn't necessarily choose the topmost linked staff of a set - I am now explicitly checking if this staff is linked to the previous. It does actually simplify the code a little too. |
MarcSabatella
force-pushed
the
66061-adjacent-linked-parts-rest
branch
from
80401a3
to
9872bc0
Compare
lasconic
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2015
…ts-rest fix #66061: corruption on new score with adjactent pairs of linked st…
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…aves
Before the big change to new score creation (for templates) back in March, this section of code differentiated between primaryStaff() and others. It no longer does, but needs to here. Probably the code for the pickup measure could be simplified with some restructuring, but my change has the advantage of being safe, I think.