Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 2607 in lilypond: Patch: Allow immediate Scheme expressions to take multiple values

> The inspiration for this ,@ is described as > > If an `(unquote-splicing ...)' form appears inside a > , then the s must evaluate to lists; the > opening and closing parentheses of the lists are then "stripped > away" and the elements of the lists are inserted in place of t

Re: add general_alignment (issue 2613) (issue 6308093)

This fails an assertion in scm_or_str2symbol, so I had to recompile with NDEBUG On 2012/06/21 07:36:31, janek wrote: Nevertheless, it's possible to override X-offset property on the ly code to use this: \override LyricText #'X-offset = #(ly:make-simple-closure (ly:make-simple-closure (l

Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 2607 in lilypond: Patch: Allow immediate Scheme expressions to take multiple values

"Trevor Daniels" writes: >> Comment #16 on issue 2607 by d...@gnu.org: Patch: Allow immediate Scheme >> expressions to take multiple values >> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2607 >> >> Good idea documenting this, though. That way people have a chance to >> notice. > > :)

PATCH: Countdown to 20120624

For 20:00 MDT Sunday June 24 Documentation: Issue 2614 : Missing Shebang line in MacOSX instructions - R 6300118 Enhancement: Issue 2607

Re: LSR updates and translations

2012/6/21 Graham Percival : > [2] let me give a huge disclaimer here: the way that we track > translations, or translation update notifications, or whatever, > could probably be improved. It can be improved because it is broken. >  I have no clue what those git > committishes are doing; at first

Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 2607 in lilypond: Patch: Allow immediate Scheme expressions to take multiple values

> Comment #16 on issue 2607 by d...@gnu.org: Patch: Allow immediate Scheme > expressions to take multiple values > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2607 > > Good idea documenting this, though. That way people have a chance to > notice. :) I've noticed, and I've read it, t

Re: add general_alignment (issue 2613) (issue 6308093)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm#newcode969 scm/define-grob-properties.scm:969: be used (for example X@tie{}extent) and the

Re: LSR updates and translations

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:50:42AM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > I'd like to propose a pretty radical change to this process. I > propose that /Documentation/snippets/ is a straight copy of a recent > LSR tarball. I assume you mean the doc-related LSR tarball, not the full LSR tarball. > It's the

Re: LSR updates and translations

Il giorno mer, 20/06/2012 alle 19.40 +0200, Jean-Charles Malahieude ha scritto: > Just a nitpick: since info files are built during the "make" phase, it > might be more judicious to attach "make snippets" to this phase. Oh, that's right, I forgot about those Info files without images; in make lan

Re: Issue 1320: Scheme bar line interface (issue 6305115)

Am 21.06.2012 08:35, schrieb Marc Hohl: Am 20.06.2012 21:34, schrieb benko@gmail.com: http://codereview.appspot.com/6305115/diff/1/scm/bar-line.scm File scm/bar-line.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6305115/diff/1/scm/bar-line.scm#newcode83 scm/bar-line.scm:83: (define (make-colo

Re: add general_alignment (issue 2613) (issue 6308093)

Looks good; I hope to try it using your example-input on the bug-tracker issue 2613 within a day or so. http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-p

Re: Issue 1320: Scheme bar line interface (issue 6305115)

Am 20.06.2012 21:13, schrieb mts...@gmail.com: Good work - two overall things. [...] 2) Have you tested performance hits on large scores? It may be worth it to leave bar-line.cc as the default and have your script as a Scheme implementation, not unlike the way we do bezier curves. I did a tes

Re: add general_alignment (issue 2613) (issue 6308093)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm#newcode984 scm/define-grob-properties.scm:984: (Y-alignment ,list? "3-element list specifyi

Re: add general_alignment (issue 2613) (issue 6308093)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm File scm/define-grob-properties.scm (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6308093/diff/10001/scm/define-grob-properties.scm#newcode984 scm/define-grob-properties.scm:984: (Y-alignment ,list? "3-element list specifyi

Re: add general_alignment (issue 2613) (issue 6308093)

Hi all, i've found why it was breaking make - an interface for properties was missing. It is added now. I've decided not to change any grob properties with this patch (i.e. only add new method, not use it yet). Thus, there should be no regressions at all. Nevertheless, it's possible to overrid