Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread David Kastrup
Alex Schreiber writes: > On 2017-11-01 10:51, David Kastrup wrote: >> >> I don't really agree: that way lies madness. Do we take the time when >> something stops working reliably, or the time when it stops working >> altogether? I do try to keep rules "idempotent" as much as possible, >> makin

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread Alex Schreiber
On 2017-11-01 10:51, David Kastrup wrote: > > I don't really agree: that way lies madness. Do we take the time when > something stops working reliably, or the time when it stops working > altogether? I do try to keep rules "idempotent" as much as possible, > making it harmless to apply them mult

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread David Kastrup
Malte Meyn writes: > Am 01.11.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Malte Meyn: >> One could have the same convert-ly rule twice: First time for the >> version where a new feature is introduced and it’s *possible and >> recommended* to use it. Second time for the version where the old >> feature (and thus backwa

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread Malte Meyn
Am 01.11.2017 um 10:43 schrieb Malte Meyn: One could have the same convert-ly rule twice: First time for the version where a new feature is introduced and it’s *possible and recommended* to use it. Second time for the version where the old feature (and thus backward compatibility) is removed

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread Malte Meyn
Am 01.11.2017 um 09:26 schrieb David Kastrup: I see that commit 589ba7953e92ad4ad793d89291b97d738614408e Author: Reinhold Kainhofer Date: Sat Jun 28 14:07:25 2008 +0200 New function: \ottava #oct, replaces #(set-octavation oct) was introduced in 2.11.53, _including_ the convert-ly ru

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread David Kastrup
Alex Schreiber writes: > A file with content > > {c''' #(set-octavation 1) c''' #(set-octavation 0) c'''} > > compiles just fine in lilypond 2.12.0, but not in lilypond 2.18.2. However, > > convert-ly --from=2.12.0 --to=2.18.2 file.ly > > does not change anything. > It seems as if > > @rule ((2,

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread James Lowe
Alex, On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 22:35:59 +0100, Alex Schreiber wrote: > A file with content > > {c''' #(set-octavation 1) c''' #(set-octavation 0) c'''} > > compiles just fine in lilypond 2.12.0, but not in lilypond 2.18.2. However, > > convert-ly --from=2.12.0 --to=2.18.2 file.ly > > does not cha

Re: conversion rule for set-octavation/ottava with wrong version number?

2017-11-01 Thread James Lowe
Alex, On Tue, 31 Oct 2017 22:35:59 +0100, Alex Schreiber wrote: > A file with content > > {c''' #(set-octavation 1) c''' #(set-octavation 0) c'''} > > compiles just fine in lilypond 2.12.0, but not in lilypond 2.18.2. However, > > convert-ly --from=2.12.0 --to=2.18.2 file.ly > > does not cha