Re: Issue 2026 (markup utility) should keep empty-markup positionless

Hello, 2012/2/4 Robin Bannister > is it not better to add a coment to the issue? >> > Perhaps that is the most suitable way of relaying this report. (IMO I > shouldn't need a Google account to report something like this.) > Thanks. I have added a new comment: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/is

Re: Issue 2026 (markup utility) should keep empty-markup positionless

James writes: > On 3 February 2012 21:00, Marek Klein wrote: >> Hello, >> >> 2012/2/1 Robin Bannister >> >>> In >>> http://code.google.com/p/**lilypond/issues/detail?id=**2026#c32Ian >>> Hulin wrote: >>> This is fixed if we move

Re: Issue 2026 (markup utility) should keep empty-markup positionless

Marek Klein wrote: Is this a bug report? One view: This is about a bug in the making, not yet available in an unstable version. So CG says you should relay this to dev (to which I am not subscribed). Another view: Ian's empty-markup patch passed the reg tests. This in itself is a regres

Re: Issue 2026 (markup utility) should keep empty-markup positionless

Hello, On 3 February 2012 21:00, Marek Klein wrote: > Hello, > > 2012/2/1 Robin Bannister > >> In >> http://code.google.com/p/**lilypond/issues/detail?id=**2026#c32Ian >> Hulin wrote: >> >>> This is fixed if we move the definition of

Re: Issue 2026 (markup utility) should keep empty-markup positionless

Hello, 2012/2/1 Robin Bannister > In > http://code.google.com/p/**lilypond/issues/detail?id=**2026#c32Ian > Hulin wrote: > >> This is fixed if we move the definition of the \null markup to the before >> the empty-markup declaration a

Issue 2026 (markup utility) should keep empty-markup positionless

In http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2026#c32 Ian Hulin wrote: This is fixed if we move the definition of the \null markup to the before the empty-markup declaration and change empty-markup to (define-public (empty-markup) make-null-markup)) ... It's built the docs successfu