2011/7/31 James Lowe :
>
> I imagine some underground bunker with walls of charts and a big map of the
> lilypond code with ladies wearing headsets pushing flags around with all our
> names on them.
And Graham watches everything smoking a cigar :)
Janek
I haven't seen any interest in
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1771
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1732
This is unfortunate, since it means that we can't have a release
candidate on Aug 01.
I fully expect to lose a whole week of otherwise productive work
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 09:26:04PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> For the past while, I've had to run make doc more than once to get it to
> succeed. I've been unable to track down the problem, but since multiple
> runs fixes it, I haven't worried too much about it.
That's not reliable; make doc c
Carl Sorensen byu.edu> writes:
> error: failed files: "6e/lily-5d49e0f2.ly 85/lily-8f5bb797.ly
> 73/lily-b2bdecac.ly 1f/lily-78f1d22c.ly cf/lily-a34c4419.ly
> c0/lily-66f81f54.ly f5/lily-67985894.ly 5d/lily-a5120b71.ly
> 32/lily-8af6d1a5.ly 88/lily-a8992af6.ly cb/lily-55c6c8df.ly
> e5/lily-c86e7
On 2011/07/30 15:18:58, Janek Warchol wrote:
2011/7/29 :
>
> The old code first ensured that accidentals were at least
> 0.3-space away from the barline, and then added the
> full-measure-extra-space on top of that.
I'm not sure if you achieved what you meant.
Oops. Right. Thanks.
I had i
On 7/30/11 9:03 PM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
> On 7/30/11 8:38 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:40:27AM +, James Lowe wrote:
>>> "/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/build/out/lybook-db/snippet-names--1673544600.ly"
>>> Child returned 1
>>> make[4]: *** [out-www/papersize-doc
On 7/30/11 8:38 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:40:27AM +, James Lowe wrote:
>> "/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/build/out/lybook-db/snippet-names--1673544600.ly"
>> Child returned 1
>> make[4]: *** [out-www/papersize-docs.texi] Error 1
>
> Looks like it doesn't like
> i
On 11-07-30 08:38 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:40:27AM +, James Lowe wrote:
"/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/build/out/lybook-db/snippet-names--1673544600.ly"
Child returned 1
make[4]: *** [out-www/papersize-docs.texi] Error 1
Looks like it doesn't like
input/regression
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:40:27AM +, James Lowe wrote:
> "/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/build/out/lybook-db/snippet-names--1673544600.ly"
> Child returned 1
> make[4]: *** [out-www/papersize-docs.texi] Error 1
Looks like it doesn't like
input/regression/lilypond-book/papersize-docs.tely
What ha
2011/7/31 James Lowe :
> Hello,
>
> I'm not able to make doc. The last time it worked was around wed last week (I
> don't make doc that often).
>
> I have gone back to a backup of my lilydev from 2 weeks ago and git pulled -r
> to make sure it wasn't to do with all this build testing I've been do
Hello,
I'm not able to make doc. The last time it worked was around wed last week (I
don't make doc that often).
I have gone back to a backup of my lilydev from 2 weeks ago and git pulled -r
to make sure it wasn't to do with all this build testing I've been doing.
But I get the same error and
On 7/30/11 5:56 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
> Carl Sorensen writes:
>
>> The principles:
>>
>> \tweak comes immediately before the object to be modified.
>
> Except when not.
>
> \tweak ... c
>
> does not work, you need to do
>
> <\tweak ... c>
>
\tweak still comes immediately before
Carl Sorensen writes:
> The principles:
>
> \tweak comes immediately before the object to be modified.
Except when not.
\tweak ... c
does not work, you need to do
<\tweak ... c>
instead. I have half a mind to change isolated notes not to use chords
(which would likely fix that problem), but
On 7/30/11 4:37 PM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
> W dniu 30 lipca 2011 18:18 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
> napisał:
>>
>> On 7/30/11 9:33 AM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
>>>
>>> I see...
>>> The more i think about it, the more i feel it would be good to merge
>>> \set, \override and \tweak into one thingy.
On 7/30/11 5:34 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> We have somebody willing to work on this stuff. He's twiddling
> his thumbs until we get the basic guidelines down. Of course
> there will be technical implementation problems to work out later,
> but I'm really hoping that he can start work; it'
On 31/07/11 00:22, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/30/11 5:15 PM, "Wols Lists" wrote:
>
>> On 30/07/11 23:52, Wols Lists wrote:
>>> On 30/07/11 22:49, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
Doesn't pass a make check.
I get an error on
regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly
>
We have somebody willing to work on this stuff. He's twiddling
his thumbs until we get the basic guidelines down. Of course
there will be technical implementation problems to work out later,
but I'm really hoping that he can start work; it's been a month!
Are there any problems with those guidel
On 7/30/11 5:26 PM, "James Lowe" wrote:
>
> OK I see (although I think we got off topic there) so why not make stop\start,
> as an explicit command, rounded; and whatever you call 'end of barlines' that
> are either \break-ed or whatever LP does when it starts a 'new line' squared?
No need t
Hello,
From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
[lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] on behalf of Carl
Sorensen [c_soren...@byu.edu]
Sent: 31 July 2011 00:19
To: pkx1...@gmail.com; lemniskata.bernoull...@gmail.com; H
Hello,
From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
[lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] on behalf of Jan
Warchoł [lemniskata.bernoulli...@gmail.com]
Sent: 30 July 2011 23:37
To: Carl Sorensen
Cc: David Kastrup; lilypond
On 7/30/11 5:15 PM, "Wols Lists" wrote:
> On 30/07/11 23:52, Wols Lists wrote:
>> On 30/07/11 22:49, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Doesn't pass a make check.
>>>
>>> I get an error on
>>>
>>> regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly
>>>
>>> log file shows:
>>>
>>> Renaming input to:
>>>
On 7/30/11 3:35 PM, "pkx1...@gmail.com" wrote:
> On 2011/07/30 16:15:39, c_sorensen_byu.edu wrote:
>
>
>> I think that the stop/start staves is currently exactly what it should
> do.
>> It stops the staff at a location, and starts the staff at the same
> location.
>> It reflects the commands
On 30/07/11 23:52, Wols Lists wrote:
> On 30/07/11 22:49, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Doesn't pass a make check.
>>
>> I get an error on
>>
>> regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly
>>
>> log file shows:
>>
>> Renaming input to:
>> `/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/input/regression/fret-diagrams-stri
:)
From: Graham Percival [gra...@percival-music.ca]
Sent: 31 July 2011 00:07
To: James Lowe
Cc: Colin Campbell; Devel
Subject: Re: PATCH: Countdown delayed by Monster Trucks
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:39PM +, James Lowe wrote:
> ... and could those s
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 04:49:43PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote:
> I'll be less than useful Tuesday and Wednesday next week, as I'm
> managing a bit of development work by our VAR, and starting
> Thursday, I'll be offline at the Edmonton Folk Fest (John Mayall,
> Gypsy Kings, Duke Robillard . . .) u
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 12:58:38AM +0200, Jan Warchoł wrote:
> Do i understand correctly that if i have the patch in a separate
> branch that is up-to-date with master, running a fixcc on it will
> produce a patch suitable for new master?
That is my understanding. Remember to use astyle 2.02.
Ch
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 10:27:39PM +, James Lowe wrote:
> ... and could those same author's change it to 'Patch New' (not
> jump to 'Patch Review') if they'd like me to re-check the make
> and reg tests.
Sure, but you're never responsible for anything that's already
"patch-review". Attached i
On 2011/07/29 11:35:55, J_lowe wrote:
Mike's new addition to footnotes doesn't affect this patch so I would
like to
get this pushed and when Mike comes back with more explanation for his
newer
patch which will then take more reviewing I can update the
documentation with
the additions than h
http://codereview.appspot.com/4800051/diff/10001/scm/chord-name.scm
File scm/chord-name.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4800051/diff/10001/scm/chord-name.scm#newcode177
scm/chord-name.scm:177: (if (not capo-pitch)
Seems like a Lispism: '() evaluates as true. You probably should rathe
I think that you forgot to rebase your branch to origin/master before
uploading that patch. Your version does not have some of the latest
patches in the git tree, so it appears that you are reverting some of
those patches.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.s
2011/7/30 Graham Percival :
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:07:53PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote:
>> I just got home from taking my grandson to see the Monster Truck
>> show, and we had an opportunity to go for a ride in one afterwards.
>> Seeing the light in a six-year old's eyes when he realized what
http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm
File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (left):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4808063/diff/1/scm/define-markup-commands.scm#oldcode1490
scm/define-markup-commands.scm:1490: (stacked-extent (ly:stencil-extent
stacked-stencil
2011/7/30 Carl Sorensen :
> On 7/30/11 10:07 AM, "Janek Warchoł" wrote:
>> Actually, there is a problem with stop/start staves already - see
>> attached. Maybe staff lines shouldn't be rounded? I know that we
>> round most things, but i think it's not that much important in case of
>> stafflines,
On 30/07/11 22:49, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
> Doesn't pass a make check.
>
> I get an error on
>
> regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly
>
> log file shows:
>
> Renaming input to:
> `/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/input/regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly'
>
> Interpreting music... E
On 11-07-30 04:27 PM, James Lowe wrote:
Hello,
From: Graham Percival [gra...@percival-music.ca]
Sent: 30 July 2011 21:23
To: Colin Campbell; James Lowe
Cc: Devel
Subject: Re: PATCH: Countdown delayed by Monster Trucks
Let's just pick up the pieces on Tues
If I understand correctly, ly:format might be useful for printing
Lilypond's own data structures.
Anyway, I discovered after already having applied my patch that Lilypond
was intended to replace the system format with its own version.
So the question is whether we should try to find out why this
make passes and no reg tests differences
http://codereview.appspot.com/4636081/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
W dniu 30 lipca 2011 18:18 użytkownik Carl Sorensen
napisał:
>
> On 7/30/11 9:33 AM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
>>
>> I see...
>> The more i think about it, the more i feel it would be good to merge
>> \set, \override and \tweak into one thingy. Doing so would make music
>> functions like above one qu
Reviewers: dak,
Message:
This patch removes all deprecation warnings about Guile format needing
two parameters.
This is the original patch as pushed by David, plus changes in
ly/init.ly, ly/titling-init.ly and ly/graphviz_init.ly to use ly:format
instead of format in embedded scheme statements.
2011/7/30 James Lowe :
> Hello,
>
> )-Original Message-
> )From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
> )[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On
> )Behalf Of David Kastrup
> )Sent: 30 July 2011 17:34
> )To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
> )Subject: Re:
Hello,
From: Graham Percival [gra...@percival-music.ca]
Sent: 30 July 2011 21:23
To: Colin Campbell; James Lowe
Cc: Devel
Subject: Re: PATCH: Countdown delayed by Monster Trucks
Let's just pick up the pieces on Tuesday, with any patches that
can be applied
Passes make and reg test.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:36:38PM +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> On 29 July 2011 17:20, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> > Could somebody get rid of these already? They're left-over from
> > Valentin's note name changes from Dec 2010 or so;
>
> They come from parsing string-tunings-init.ly.
> > they
Carl Sorensen writes:
> On 7/30/11 2:19 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> music_list in parser.yy temporarily maintains an awkward
>> half-self-referential data structure in order to have "fast append". It
>> makes more sense in my opinion to use prepend and reverse afterwards.
Passes make and reg tests all ok. No errors reported.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4807053/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Doesn't pass a make check.
I get an error on
regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly
log file shows:
Renaming input to:
`/home/jlowe/lilypond-git/input/regression/fret-diagrams-string-thickness.ly'
Interpreting music... ERROR: In procedure ly:pitch-transpose:
ERROR: Wrong type argument in
I will be running fixcc.py on the git repo on:
2011 Aug 01, 20:00 UST
the modified version of should be pushed about 10 minutes later.
Any patch to C++ code will need to be rebased, or some other fancy
git thing, after that time.
Apologies for the inconvenience; this should be a one-time painful
passes make and reg tests look fine.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4809057/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 2011/07/30 16:15:39, c_sorensen_byu.edu wrote:
I think that the stop/start staves is currently exactly what it should
do.
It stops the staff at a location, and starts the staff at the same
location.
It reflects the commands that have been issued. If the staff is
continuous,
there is n
I've been seeing these warnings for months:
Processing web site: [cs]
WARNING: Unable to find node 'Řešení potíží' in book usage.
WARNING: Unable to find node 'Proč se mění skladba?' in book
usage.
Processing web site: [de]
Processing web site: [es]
Processing web site: [fr]
Processing web site: [h
LGTM, but we need a regtest before pushing.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4800051/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On 7/30/11 2:19 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> music_list in parser.yy temporarily maintains an awkward
> half-self-referential data structure in order to have "fast append". It
> makes more sense in my opinion to use prepend and reverse afterwards.
> "Fast append" in theory may sho
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 11:07:53PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote:
> I just got home from taking my grandson to see the Monster Truck
> show, and we had an opportunity to go for a ride in one afterwards.
> Seeing the light in a six-year old's eyes when he realized what was
> about to happen was worth
I really like this -- thanks for taking it on.
Two small comments.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/diff/1/lily/font-config-scheme.cc
File lily/font-config-scheme.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/diff/1/lily/font-config-scheme.cc#newcode154
lily/font-config-scheme.cc:154:
Hi,
music_list in parser.yy temporarily maintains an awkward
half-self-referential data structure in order to have "fast append". It
makes more sense in my opinion to use prepend and reverse afterwards.
"Fast append" in theory may show minimally better cache coherency at the
cost of uglier code
Hello.
)-Original Message-
)From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
)[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On
)Behalf Of Reinhold Kainhofer
)Sent: 30 July 2011 19:12
)To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
)Subject: Re: music function semantics
)
)Am Sams
Am Samstag, 30. Juli 2011, 20:01:36 schrieb James Lowe:
> This is a bit too low level for me now.
Hehe. What David wanted to say: The parser correctly interprets the syntax and
properly sets the control-points for the TieEvent. So, his part of current
interest (the parser) works just fine.
Howe
Hello,
)-Original Message-
)From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
)[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On
)Behalf Of David Kastrup
)Sent: 30 July 2011 17:03
)To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
)Subject: Re: music function semantics
)
)Jan Warchoł
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Am Samstag, 30. Juli 2011, 18:28:32 schrieben Sie:
> overall commment: the parts that do the reporting should not need to
> know about the format of loglevel.
Which parts exactly do you mean? Those that call the error/message/warning
functions, or the error/message/warning functions themselves?
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Hello,
)-Original Message-
)From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org
)[mailto:lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore@gnu.org] On
)Behalf Of David Kastrup
)Sent: 30 July 2011 17:34
)To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
)Subject: Re: GOP-PROP 7: Developers as resources
)
-
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/diff/1/lily/all-font-metrics.cc
File lily/all-font-metrics.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4822055/diff/1/lily/all-font-metrics.cc#newcode91
lily/all-font-metrics.cc:91: debug_output ("[" + string (pango_fn),
true); // start on a new line
On 2011/0
On 2011/07/30 17:10:00, Ian Hulin (gmail) wrote:
I'm currently working on main.cc and lily.scm as part of T1686, and
may need
help with merging if this patch gets pushed first.
Sure, no problem. But AFAICS, the file loading and the path lists do not
really overlap with this patch, so merging
New patch from Wol uploaded.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4800051/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Am Samstag, 30. Juli 2011, 18:18:49 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
> On 7/30/11 9:33 AM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
> > I see...
> > The more i think about it, the more i feel it would be good to merge
> > \set, \override and \tweak into one thingy. Doing so would make music
> > functions like above one quite
FWIW LGTM apart from attached comments,
I'm currently working on main.cc and lily.scm as part of T1686, and may
need help with merging if this patch gets pushed first.
Is your current design extensible to allow us to segment the old verbose
option by function as well as debug trace level?
Maybe
2011/7/29 :
>> Aww, i was so proud of this code...
>
> :-)
>
>> Frankly, i don't think we will gain anything from defining
>> a global value. The algorithm i wrote is a bit complicated,
>> but i thinks is easier to understand than what you suggest
>> (if i understood your suggestion correctly).
Jan Warchoł writes:
> 2011/7/29 Graham Percival :
>
>> All I know is that it can't be me for the remainder of 2011. In
>> the first place I'd be an iffy choice due to my relative
>> inexperience with lilypond programming, but the main reason is
>> that I'm needed to run GOP and GLISS.
>
> Then i
overall commment: the parts that do the reporting should not need to
know about the format of loglevel.
I think it would be better to have a
if (log(ERROR))
{
..
}
or perhaps even
log(ERROR, "...")
rather than having each bit do the bitmasking separately like in this
patch.
http:
On 7/30/11 9:33 AM, "Jan Warchoł" wrote:
>
> I see...
> The more i think about it, the more i feel it would be good to merge
> \set, \override and \tweak into one thingy. Doing so would make music
> functions like above one quite simpler.
While I could see that perhaps we could combine \set
2011/7/29 Graham Percival :
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 09:56:38AM +0200, Jan Warchoł wrote:
>> What will happen if we sign up to a team and not do our
>> "homework"?
>
> Same idea? Team leader has a chat with you, and in extreme cases
> would just stop assigning you work to do. I don't think this
On 7/30/11 10:07 AM, "Janek Warchoł"
wrote:
> 2011/7/29 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
>
>> then again, if the barline is horizontally aligned, it may not be a
>> problem. I think the problem may still occur if you stop/start staves
>> half-way the page, but we may decide it's not important enough.
>
> Act
Jan Warchoł writes:
> 2011/7/29 James Lowe :
>>
>> 29 July 2011 08:11 Jan Warchol wrote:
>> )...ah, so it is possible to modify ties in a chord separately! Do
>> you realize
>> )that i didn't know about it?
>>
>> Snippet for LSR?
>
> I tried to write it, and do you know what? It doesn't work!
2011/7/29 David Kastrup :
> Jan Warchoł writes:
>> if i understood you correctly (it's about the difference in syntax
>> between tweak and override?), i agree that it's quite a serious
>> problem.
>
> There is not all that much, really. Take a look at music-functions.scm,
> for example style-note
2011/7/29 James Lowe :
>
> 29 July 2011 08:11 Jan Warchol wrote:
> )...ah, so it is possible to modify ties in a chord separately! Do you
> realize
> )that i didn't know about it?
>
> Snippet for LSR?
I tried to write it, and do you know what? It doesn't work! Very stupid.
% if you apply this
77 matches
Mail list logo
