On Jun 5, 2019, at 09:33, d...@gnu.org wrote:
>
> The resulting comment text is nonsensical. That might have been a clue
> that the resulting behavior is not up to par, either.
I took a new job last October and it doesn’t leave me with much energy to dig
into LilyPond issues.
—
Dan
_
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am Do., 6. Juni 2019 um 00:10 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
>> > I need to know the actual slope of a Beam.
>> > Probably too naive, but I thought I could go for (pseudocode):
>> > positions-delta / X-positions-delta
>> > If this is wrong, I have no good idea how to do it
Am Do., 6. Juni 2019 um 00:10 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
> > I need to know the actual slope of a Beam.
> > Probably too naive, but I thought I could go for (pseudocode):
> > positions-delta / X-positions-delta
> > If this is wrong, I have no good idea how to do it different.
> >
> > Any hints?
>
Thomas Morley writes:
> Am Mi., 5. Juni 2019 um 23:56 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>>
>> Thomas Morley writes:
>>
>> > while working on automated slashed Beams, I noticed my
>> > stencil-procedure was always inexact for non-horizontal Beams. I
>> > looked at 'X-positions and 'positions of a Beam
Am Mi., 5. Juni 2019 um 23:56 Uhr schrieb David Kastrup :
>
> Thomas Morley writes:
>
> > while working on automated slashed Beams, I noticed my
> > stencil-procedure was always inexact for non-horizontal Beams. I
> > looked at 'X-positions and 'positions of a Beam to get it's slope and
> > derive
Thomas Morley writes:
> while working on automated slashed Beams, I noticed my
> stencil-procedure was always inexact for non-horizontal Beams. I
> looked at 'X-positions and 'positions of a Beam to get it's slope and
> derived the slope from those values.
>
> But the visible gradient obviously r
Hi,
while working on automated slashed Beams, I noticed my
stencil-procedure was always inexact for non-horizontal Beams. I
looked at 'X-positions and 'positions of a Beam to get it's slope and
derived the slope from those values.
But the visible gradient obviously relies on blot-diameter as well
Reviewers: thomasmorley651,
Message:
Please do *not* review this patch anymore, it has (for some reason that
is surely my fault) been replaced with
https://codereview.appspot.com/580780043/ so please review *that*...
Description:
New function css-color (accompanying x11-color)
I was asked if Li
Reviewers: ,
Message:
This is a follow-up patch to
https://codereview.appspot.com/570690043/
For some reason it was uploaded as a new patch,
and Issue
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/5524/
wasn't updated.
This new patch attempts a cleaner separation of color
definitions between
https://codereview.appspot.com/231680043/diff/11/lily/lily-guile.cc
File lily/lily-guile.cc (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/231680043/diff/11/lily/lily-guile.cc#newcode459
lily/lily-guile.cc:459: // unsmob delivers true. This means that
unsmob is a
The resulting comment text is
LGTM, thanks, with one minor remaining nit.
https://codereview.appspot.com/550780043/diff/570700043/Documentation/notation/world.itely
File Documentation/notation/world.itely (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/550780043/diff/570700043/Documentation/notation/world.itely#newcode562
Documenta
Hello,
Here is the current patch countdown list. The next countdown will be on
Jun 7th
A quick synopsis of all patches currently in the review process can be
found here:
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/allura/
Push:
5523 configure.ac: Add `-Wno-sequence-point' to g++ CFLAGS for Guile 1.8
12 matches
Mail list logo
