Episema beneath scandicus

[rarty]

I've been testing the developer build against some outstanding issues I've noted in my scores. The new episema code is working quite well!

Here is a case of the correct episema not appearing as expected, but perhaps this case wasn't foreseen, as I don't see it in any of the tests (I don't think the scandicus is completetest.gabc).

The expected result, (from Scriptum est enim percutiam as in the Liber Usualis):

The episema only partially appears:

au(j_0k_0l)tem(k.)

The correct episema appears, but with a strange duplication on the second note:

au(j_0!k_0l)tem(k.)

[henryso]

@rarty Please type gregorio -V into a command prompt or shell and paste the result here.

[rarty]

This is from 3.0.0-develop-9a387b6-1.

[henryso]

I can fix (j_0k_0l). It's actually an incorrect position number chosen for the second note in the scandicus. However, I need help with the second. The second form, (j_0!k_0l), produces:

\gresyllable{}{au}{}{0}{\gresetnextsyllable{t}{e}{m}}{}{0}{}{%
\greglyph{\grecpPunctum}{j}{k}{0}{}{%
\grehepisemusbridge{i}{}{}%
\grehepisemus{i}{0}{0}{1}{f}{i}%
}%
\greendofglyph{1}%
\greglyph{\grecpPesOneNothing}{k}{k}{0}%
{%
\greadditionalline{18}{0}{2}%
}{%
\grehepisemus{i}{0}{0}{1}{f}{i}%
}%
}%

From my limited understanding, the \grehepisemusbridge is at the right height. However, it is drawn a bit higher than it should be. It might be easier to see the problem with (j_0/k_0l), which has the same issue. Is gregorio passing the correct thing? What should I make it pass instead?

[henryso]

Typing that actually gave me a clue. Maybe I can actually figure this out...

[henryso]

This is ready for review and merge.