On 2011/05/01 02:44:31, hanwenn wrote:
Can you document what this is doing?
My idea was to have a datatype
class RealSubset {
// Starts out as full interval
Real_subset();
// Remove an interval
remove(Interval v);
// Return sorted, non-overlapping list of allowed interv
Can you document what this is doing?
My idea was to have a datatype
class RealSubset {
// Starts out as full interval
Real_subset();
// Remove an interval
remove(Interval v);
// Return sorted, non-overlapping list of allowed intervals
vector allowed() const;
// implement with lis
Sorry about that...back to German 101!
http://codereview.appspot.com/4426072/diff/1001/lily/beam.cc
File lily/beam.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4426072/diff/1001/lily/beam.cc#newcode1272
lily/beam.cc:1272: Interval vorboten;
On 2011/05/01 00:56:39, Carl wrote:
We shouldn't use ger
Looks good to me -- just a comment on a variable name.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4426072/diff/1001/lily/beam.cc
File lily/beam.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4426072/diff/1001/lily/beam.cc#newcode1272
lily/beam.cc:1272: Interval vorboten;
We shouldn't use german words for variabl
Reviewers: ,
Message:
This is a significant rewrite of one chunk of of beam.cc that fixes
issue 1613.
I won't have the time to run the regtests today to think if it breaks
anything, but I have run it on several test files and it seems to yield
good results. Please look it over and let me know w
On Apr 30, 2011, at 3:49 PM, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2011, at 3:45 PM, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Regtest for 1640?
>>
>>
>>
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/4457042/
>
> Added.
Pushed as 475a1f94b5733476d746d2c012809f3f2e6f0fcc.
Cheers,
MS
___
On 4/30/11 4:51 PM, "m...@apollinemike.com" wrote:
> On Apr 30, 2011, at 8:03 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:52:42AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>> On 4/30/11 8:49 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>>>
We don't need to be sure that we're clear. All we need... or a
On Apr 30, 2011, at 8:03 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:52:42AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> On 4/30/11 8:49 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>>
>>> We don't need to be sure that we're clear. All we need... or at
>>> least, all I want before uploading the official 2.14.0.
On Apr 30, 2011, at 3:45 PM, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
> Regtest for 1640?
>
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4457042/
Added.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Regtest for 1640?
http://codereview.appspot.com/4457042/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4457042/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: ,
Message:
This patch fixes issues 1639 and 1640.
Description:
Fixes issues 1639 and 1640.
Consecutive glissandos are typeset, and line breaks can happen
with killed glissandi.
Please review this at http://codereview.appspot.com/4457042/
Affected files:
A input/regression/glissan
LGTM.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4278058/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4278058/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 2011/03/22 06:28:42, joeneeman wrote:
In that case, a better way to avoid too many warnings might
be just to add a static bool to check if a warning has already
been issued.
Done, and removed the original code that had no effect.
Given that the old code merely printed warning, the warning te
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:52:42AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 4/30/11 8:49 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
> > We don't need to be sure that we're clear. All we need... or at
> > least, all I want before uploading the official 2.14.0... is for
> > one week without *known* Critical bugs.
>
On 4/30/11 8:49 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:37:01AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>
>> I actually think it would be more work to remove the beam-collision-engraver
>> than to keep it in. But at this point I expect it to be months before we
>> are sure we're clear of
On Sat, Apr 30, 2011 at 08:37:01AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> I actually think it would be more work to remove the beam-collision-engraver
> than to keep it in. But at this point I expect it to be months before we
> are sure we're clear of Critical bugs in beam-collision engraver.
We don't
LGTM. A couple of non-essential comments.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4442083/diff/12001/input/regression/rest-polyphonic-2.ly
File input/regression/rest-polyphonic-2.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4442083/diff/12001/input/regression/rest-polyphonic-2.ly#newcode5
input/regression
LGTM, although I'm not an expert on articulate.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4435069/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM, with Neil's comments implemented.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4449061/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 4/30/11 8:07 AM, "Phil Holmes" wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Carl Sorensen"
> To: "Lily devel"
> Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 1:59 PM
> Subject: Backporting / stable
>
>
>> So it appears that the biggest source of Critical bugs, and the thing that
>> is holding up relea
- Original Message -
From: "Carl Sorensen"
To: "Lily devel"
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 1:59 PM
Subject: Backporting / stable
So it appears that the biggest source of Critical bugs, and the thing that
is holding up release of 2.14, is the beam-collision-engraver.
Should we try to
So it appears that the biggest source of Critical bugs, and the thing that
is holding up release of 2.14, is the beam-collision-engraver.
Should we try to remove the beam-collision-engraver from 2.14.0? Or should
we wait for it to settle itself out and make it part of 2.14.0? I can see
arguments
24 matches
Mail list logo
