Hi guys, Le lundi 01 février 2010 à 16:39 +0000, Neil Puttock a écrit : > On 1 February 2010 06:36, Patrick McCarty <pnor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry, here's a real patch (in case this is the correct fix). > > Heh, that's the exact opposite of John's intention, I believe. :)
Indeed, good catch! > Any item which has a match in PROCESSING_INDEPENDENT_OPTIONS is > supposed to be removed. Unfortunately, the double loop ends up > removing one match while duplicating seven others (hence why some > options show eight copies, whereas others have seven). > > I attach my first successful attempt at a fix (complete with silly > debug output and badly placed function def ;) below; Thanks, I'm testing, amending and pushing ASAP. > surely there's a > simpler method than using filter ()? I'd suggest a list comprehension. > BTW, this duplication happens again when the hash is updated, so the > following lines would also need correcting: > > 1286 for option in self.get_option_list (): > 1287 for name in PROCESSING_INDEPENDENT_OPTIONS: > 1288 if not option.startswith (name): > 1289 hash.update (option) Exactly. Please wait for me to pushing this patch with amendments. Best, John
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
_______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
