Philip Rhoades <p...@pricom.com.au> writes:
> David,
>>
>>> - I probably should have posted the code, then it would have been
>>> clear straight away - but it wasn't a copy and paste problem.
>>
>> So why then did you _first_ state that Paul's version did not work,
>> including a quote of _Paul's_ version rather than the LSR?
>>
>> _That's_ when I stated I considered this likely a copy&paste error.
>> And
>> it apparently was. Either you did not properly copy&paste Paul's
>> version when trying it out, or you did not properly copy&paste the
>> resulting error message when trying (without telling anybody) the LSR
>> version.
>
>
> This is getting silly - I will explain what happened:
>
> - I had previously run your new snippet quite satisfactorily
>
> - I had previously run Paul's changed version quite satisfactorily
>
> - I had forgotten about the convert-ly thing
>
> - I wasn't going to bother about the old version in the LSR when Paul
> mentioned it, but just out of interest, I thought I would give it go -
> it failed with the error - I don't like things not working so I
> persisted
>
> - The quick inspection showed the old version with a "#" and the new
> versions with "$" - so I changed it and tried again - still the same
> error
>
> - Probably hastily, I reported the error
And you reported it as an error in Paul's version even though you
previously _did_ run Paul's version successfully. Your "quick
inspection" obviously _failed_ to turn up _all_ of the differences
between Paul's version and the LSR so you tested something different.
That's what one calls a "copy and paste" error: failure to actually test
the claimed code by testing something different through oversight.
> - You said it was probably a cut and paste problem - I knew it wasn't
> but I tried different methods of getting the code but still got the
> error
>
> - Still missing the real issue (and probably annoyed that you
> suggested it was a newbie "who doesn't know how to cut an paste"
> problem) I replied (too hastily again) that it wasn't a cut and paste
> problem
>
> - You said it must be some problem so I did the diffs - which finally
> showed up the problem with the missing entire line and it's associated
> bracket
Copy and paste error. The failure to actually test what was quoted is
called "copy and paste error". Here is what you wrote in full:
From: Philip Rhoades <p...@pricom.com.au>
Subject: Re: "Generative music" and "Algorithmic composition"
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 17:58:28 +1100 (8 hours, 56 minutes, 8 seconds ago)
Reply-To: p...@pricom.com.au
David,
On 2014-01-16 07:43, David Kastrup wrote:
> Paul Morris <p...@paulwmorris.com> writes:
>
>> SoundsFromSound wrote
>>> Paul, that is a great little bit of code! Thank you for sharing
>>> that...I'm
>>> going to play around with it later today. :)
>>
>> Glad you like it, but David Kastrup gets the credit for it:
>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2014-01/msg00638.html
>>
>> I just changed it from a set of 12 chromatic notes to those in C
>> major and
>> added \transpose. Maybe it's worth adding it to the
>> LSR... hmmm... looks
>> like there's already a random note generator there:
>> http://lsr.dsi.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=274
>>
>> It generates notes in the current key from (middle) c' up to g''
>> Here it is after running convert-ly (from 2.14.0 to 2.18.0):
>>
>> \version "2.18.0"
>> \score {
>> {
>> $(let ((random-state (seed->random-state (current-time))))
>> (make-sequential-music
>> (map (lambda (x)
>> (let ((idx (random 12 random-state)))
>
>> (make-event-chord
>> (list
>
> You can forego the above two lines (of course removing the respective
> closing parens later on) nowadays.
>
>> (make-music 'NoteEvent
>> 'duration (ly:make-duration 2 0 1/1)
>> 'pitch (ly:make-pitch
>> (quotient idx 7)
>> (remainder idx 7)
>> 0))))))
>> (make-list 24))))
>
> Ok, make-list is a tad-bit more basic and efficient than the iota I
> employed.
I get a GUILE error on line 5
$(let
anyway . . I tried changing it to:
$@(let
but that didn't work either (obviously I don't know what I'm doing . .)
Regards,
Phil.
You did not, I repeat _not_ mention in any way that you used any code
other than that which was quoted here (actually stating "Here it is
after running convert-ly (from 2.14.0 to 2.18.0):" even though it might
have appeared to be gobbledygook to you at that time).
You did not mention what code you used and where this error message was
from. It was absolutely impossible to guess that you were testing
anything other than what you quoted.
You did not, at any time, in spite of repeated notices that you failed
to provide the problematic source and the actual error messages, provide
this missing information until quite a bit of time later.
> So, yes it was a "newbie" problem - but not for the reasons you said.
Exactly for the reasons I said. If you want to come to the conclusion
that I am a block-headed idiot, this thread will provide you with plenty
of perfectly convincing evidence. But not where you state it does.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
