From visual inspection, LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7615043/diff/1/scm/output-lib.scm
File scm/output-lib.scm (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7615043/diff/1/scm/output-lib.scm#newcode929
scm/output-lib.scm:929: form. @code{x} is the portion of the width
consumed for a given lin
On 2013/03/07 21:25:04, benko.pal wrote:
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely
File Documentation/notation/ancient.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode952
Documentation/not
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely
File Documentation/notation/ancient.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode952
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:952: @c @end example
On 2
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely
File Documentation/notation/ancient.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely#newcode952
Documentation/notation/ancient.itely:952: @c @end example
On 2
On 2013/03/07 18:10:46, J_lowe wrote:
On 2013/03/07 17:31:08, dak wrote:
> On 2013/03/07 15:56:52, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> > Looking good. Obviously the text which describes
> > \relative will need attention too,
>
> Not just that. So far all humanly written changes are constrained
to
> pytho
some white mensural examples change, but that doesn't matter (if anybody
prefers not changing an example, I can fix those). I hope Greogrian
examples don't change - I don't know whether it would matter.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7538043/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/ancient.itely
File D
On 2013/03/07 17:31:08, dak wrote:
On 2013/03/07 15:56:52, Trevor Daniels wrote:
> Looking good. Obviously the text which describes
> \relative will need attention too,
Not just that. So far all humanly written changes are constrained to
python/convertrules.ly and ly/music-functions-init.ly
On 2013/03/07 15:56:52, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Looking good. Obviously the text which describes
\relative will need attention too,
Not just that. So far all humanly written changes are constrained to
python/convertrules.ly and ly/music-functions-init.ly (the actual
change of the definition).
Looking good. Obviously the text which describes
\relative will need attention too, but this is now
looking like a change worth making.
Trevor
https://codereview.appspot.com/7546044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lis
David Kastrup wrote:
>Do you intend creating a fix for issue 3204?
The fix is to perform the single expression substitution that I described,
on the line identified by the error message, which is the only place such
an expression appears. I thought my description was clear enough, but as
it's not
On 2013/03/07 09:25:11, dak wrote:
Sorry for the repetition. My browser very much made it appear like it
had lost the previous comment, so I rewrote it from scratch. I see no
way to delete comments from Rietveld (as opposed to Codeview).
https://codereview.appspot.com/7546044/
___
On 2013/03/07 07:19:01, janek wrote:
Hi,
i like the idea of \relative interpreting the first pitch "in
absolute" if
there's no explicit reference pitch.
However, i don't think we should promote this way of doing things:
it's a
shorthand, and with LilyPond it's usually better to be expli
On 2013/03/07 07:19:01, janek wrote:
Hi,
i like the idea of \relative interpreting the first pitch "in
absolute" if
there's no explicit reference pitch.
However, i don't think we should promote this way of doing things:
it's a
shorthand, and with LilyPond it's usually better to be explicit
13 matches
Mail list logo
