Am 10.08.2012 19:00, schrieb Benkő Pál:
hi Marc,
I noticed that your patch didn't include the changes
in bar-line.scm – was that intentional?
The new regtests are already in master; I didn't compile
the regtests, but surely they look strange without the
changes in the colon stencil routine?
ye
On 2012/08/10 16:20:30, hanwenn wrote:
On 2012/08/10 16:16:47, dak wrote:
>
> and #{ ... #} looks for "parser", and you don't want to change the
name of the
> first argument of music functions.
the first name of the music function argument is irrelevant, as it
locally
scoped.
Wrong. #{
hi Marc,
> I noticed that your patch didn't include the changes
> in bar-line.scm – was that intentional?
> The new regtests are already in master; I didn't compile
> the regtests, but surely they look strange without the
> changes in the colon stencil routine?
yes; I want to work on it. I'll le
On 10/08/12 15:06, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
I haven't looked at the code, but I don't see a reason why it wouldn't
be possible to extend that to non-power-of-2 denominators.
Great! :-)
What's odd is that it already works for some cases, but not others -- examples
attached to the bug report h
On 2012/08/10 16:16:47, dak wrote:
On 2012/08/10 16:14:55, hanwenn wrote:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc
> File lily/lily-parser.cc (right):
>
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc#newcode160
> lily/lily-parser.cc:160: // TO
On 2012/08/10 16:14:55, hanwenn wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc
File lily/lily-parser.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc#newcode160
lily/lily-parser.cc:160: // TODO: use $parser
On 2012/08/10 07:13:58, dak
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc
File lily/lily-parser.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc#newcode160
lily/lily-parser.cc:160: // TODO: use $parser
On 2012/08/10 07:13:58, dak wrote:
On 2012/08/10 06:58:57, Trevor Da
Am 07.08.2012 22:31, schrieb Benkő Pál:
[...]
If you want to cover all by one patch, I can send the changes
in bar-line.scm to you and you put them into your patch.
What do you think?
good idea, but in the end this patch may be split into four and then
the bar-line changes would go as a separa
Hello,
On 10 August 2012 09:56, Phil Holmes wrote:
> If I go to
>
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/web-big-page
>
> and click the Lily in the top left of the page, I get sent to
>
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/index
>
> which doesn't exist. Please could someone try t
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 08:32:04AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:01 AM
>
> > Scheme will be indented with a yet-to-be written
> > scripts/auxiliar/fix-scheme.sh, which does the same thing as
> > emacs.
>
> This will certainly be useful to ensure
http://codereview.appspot.com/6454121/diff/11001/input/regression/relative-repeat.ly
File input/regression/relative-repeat.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6454121/diff/11001/input/regression/relative-repeat.ly#newcode10
input/regression/relative-repeat.ly:10: \alternative { { a2_"Alt1"
On 01/08/2012 00:29, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> You get a similar error with the following:
>
> \compoundMeter #'((4 2/3 4))
>
> c'4 c'4 c'4 c'4 \times 2/3 { 4 } |
> c'4 c'4 c'4 c'4 \times 2/3 { 4 } |
>
> That is,
>
> Parsing...ERROR: In procedure ly:make-moment:
> ERROR: Wrong type
Please review updated patch set.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6454121/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
- Original Message -
From:
To: ;
Cc: ;
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: Regtest changes phase 1 (issue 6454121)
Sorry Phil, but I don't think this is an improvement.
a) The original code comments explain much more clearly
what is being tested than do your new m
On 31/07/2012 17:18, John Mandereau wrote:
> When lilypond-patchy-staging.py a.k.a. Patchy succesfully builds on MSH
> Paris Nord server, it now puts the docs on
>
> http://194.254.171.80/lilypond-web/master/
>
> This is intended for use by all developers and contributors; I'm not
> sure whether it
Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes:
> On 10/08/12 02:23, David Kastrup wrote:
>> It would have been 3+2/8 at any rate since throwing parens into the
>> token syntax would have further messed up the ambiguities, and forms
>> like 3/2+2/5 would not likely have worked.
>
> Could it improve matters to ha
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:28:35PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> > Keith OHara writes:
> >
> >> But beware that this uses mixed tabs and spaces, unless you have
> >> configured emacs to use spaces only, as most people prefer today,
> >
> > Should we put up directory-
On 10/08/12 02:23, David Kastrup wrote:
It would have been 3+2/8 at any rate since throwing parens into the
token syntax would have further messed up the ambiguities, and forms
like 3/2+2/5 would not likely have worked.
Could it improve matters to have instead something like,
3:2 + 2:5
...
David Kastrup writes:
> Keith OHara writes:
>
>> But beware that this uses mixed tabs and spaces, unless you have
>> configured emacs to use spaces only, as most people prefer today,
>
> Should we put up directory-local variables to promote this and a few
> other conventions?
Please do!
Jan
--
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:07 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> It would mean that 3/2+2/5 would mean #((3 2) (2 5)) basically wherever
> you chose to write it. Since we don't have a use for it anywhere except
> after \time (and it is actually a rather uncommon use of time), it seems
> like overkill.
>
Janek Warchoł writes:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 3:23 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>> Sorry, i don't understand. You mean that you know how to do this, but
>>> there's something else blocking you from implementing it?
>>
>> If two different things are indistinguishable, yo
If I go to
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/web-big-page
and click the Lily in the top left of the page, I get sent to
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/index
which doesn't exist. Please could someone try to reproduce this. If so, it
should be entered as a bug.
--
Phi
Keith OHara writes:
> But beware that this uses mixed tabs and spaces, unless you have
> configured emacs to use spaces only, as most people prefer today,
Should we put up directory-local variables to promote this and a few
other conventions?
File: emacs.info, Node: Directory Variables, P
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 3:23 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> Sorry, i don't understand. You mean that you know how to do this, but
>> there's something else blocking you from implementing it?
>
> If two different things are indistinguishable, you can't have them both.
>
> If
On 2012/08/10 07:54:51, Trevor Daniels wrote:
On 2012/08/09 07:36:46, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> Changed level 5 headings to @subsubheading @i{ .. }
These look fine to me in both pdf and html, so I'm
closing this review. I'll open a new issue tracker
to cover using level 5 headings uniformly.
Graham Percival percival-music.ca> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 12:21:06PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>
> > Do we explain that we're a GNU project and as
> > such use GNU coding style? Together with a pointer to the info
> > node *(standards)Formatting, that could help.
>
> Given that
Karol Majewski gmail.com> writes:
>
> Dear LilyPond friends!I have to say something that keeps me awake at night:
> Current LilyPond flags look bad!
Yours look, ever so slightly, worse.
More like a computer drew them,
and the short-note stems look as if they might fall over.
___
On 2012/08/09 07:36:46, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Changed level 5 headings to @subsubheading @i{ .. }
These look fine to me in both pdf and html, so I'm
closing this review. I'll open a new issue tracker
to cover using level 5 headings uniformly.
Trevor
http://codereview.appspot.com/6452072/
Graham Percival wrote Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:01 AM
> http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_5.html
>
> ** Proposal summary
>
> Speaking academically, scheme code style is a “solved problem”.
> Let’s pick one of the existing solutions, and let a computer deal
> with this. Humans should not was
Graham Percival wrote Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:05 AM
> Not much discussion after the mid-way point. I'm not certain if
> this means that everybody agrees, or they just think I'm
> completely wrong and it's not worth even discussing it (as
> happened with the first proposal for stable releas
Reviewers: Trevor Daniels,
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc
File lily/lily-parser.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/6460064/diff/4001/lily/lily-parser.cc#newcode160
lily/lily-parser.cc:160: // TODO: use $parser
On 2012/08/10 06:58:57, Trevor Daniels wr
31 matches
Mail list logo
