Re: 5th anniversary conference? :)

re. I live 2 minutes away... I can be there on a moment's notice, starting next week. This is exciting! On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 at 07:48, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hi Mike! > > > I live in Toronto, in the Annex. I'd love to help organize something > here if there's inte

Re: 5th anniversary conference? :)

re. possible toronto conference location I live in Toronto, in the Annex. I'd love to help organize something here if there's interest. I'm right close to the University of Toronto campus. -Mike On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 09:19, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hey all, > &

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

On 2020/02/05 18:17:25, c_sorensen wrote: > I recognize that Mike Solomon has a different opinion. I mean no disrespect to > Mike, Janek, Han-Wen, or any other member of the LilyPond team. I highly value > the team spirit of the LilyPond team. >Well said. Here's the c

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Mike Solomon writes: >> What does "implement" mean? > > Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant merge the PR. > Uh, words have meanings. There would be no point of putting something into our documentation that we are not going to follow through with. By merging it, th

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

> What does "implement" mean? Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant merge the PR.

Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

re is a code of conduct with clear steps for reporting violations and consequences for repeat offenders, so I'm probably not the best person to make the final call. ~Mike

RE: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Mike Solomon writes: > The preamble and intent is one thing; adding a corrective committee with the > authority to enact punishments based on anonymous reports is another. It > implements hierarchies and institutions exerting coercive power based on > incomplete and secret inform

RE: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by janek.lilyp...@gmail.com)

Janek Warchoł writes: > Hi, > > śr., 5 lut 2020, 00:34 użytkownik napisał: > >> What problem are we trying to solve here? >> > > In short, it's been found (I think Mike will be able to give you > specific > examples) that having code of conduct encoura

Re: Stepping down and moving on

+1 many times over. Thank you for your excellent, creative, and vital work in helping LilyPond become the world’s best and most stable digital music engraver. Best of luck! ~Mike On 10 November 2016 at 13.23.24, Kieren MacMillan (kieren_macmil...@sympatico.ca) wrote: Dear David

Re: GSoC 2016 - GNU website listing

Hey! Late to the party - I unfortunately cannot do mentoring this summer. However, all of the issues on the current website are still valid and I'd love to see someone work on them! All the best,~Mike Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. Original message From: Urs

Re: Beginning contributor needs mentor

I'll scour the tracker - there is a bit of low hanging fruit in the beautifying department that is nice because it will not be too sprawling and will result in immediately perceptible visual improvements. ~Mike Sent from my Samsung device Original message From:

RE: Beginning contributor needs mentor

is your algorithm at the heart of LilyPond's horizontal spacing engine, so that can be a place to start if you're up for it! Cheers,~Mike PS If you're not the John Gourlay of which I speak, my offer for help still stands! Sent from my Samsung device Original message --

Re: Anybody invested in ly:make-simple-closure?

> On 24 Sep 2015, at 13:18, David Kastrup wrote: > > Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > >> IIRC, it was introduced to compose offset callbacks, > > Oh, it's still being used for that as far as I can tell. Just not from > Scheme. I think before lambdas were widely used they made lots of sense. I us

Re: pure/impure?!?!

years. The complexity of the task is high, thought - it’d require a major rewrite of a lot of things. Cheers, ~Mike ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: pure/impure?!?!

On 21 May 2015, at 11:01, David Kastrup wrote: > > > In the CG I read > >For certain grobs, the @code{Y-extent} is based on the @code{stencil} >property, overriding the stencil property of one of these will >require an additional @code{Y-extent} override with an unpure-pure >con

Re: Added recorder diagram (issue 153380043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)

> On Nov 2, 2014, at 10:58 PM, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: > > i don't know scheme, so i was mainly pattern-matching from existing > diagrams. some issues i had while trying to figure this out: > > - what is the purpose of the baked-in cc/lh/rh grouping? > This was a feature of the original desi

Re: Added recorder diagram (issue 153380043 by pkx1...@gmail.com)

On Nov 2, 2014, at 10:58 PM, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote: > > I'm not comfortable pushing this, there were some things on the original > email > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2014-10/msg00024.html > > (after which I offered to help move a patch through the list) that I am > simply

Re: Limit looping in Grob::common_refpoint (issue 4079) (issue 134600043 by e...@ticalc.org)

On Sep 7, 2014, at 9:46 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> +1. The only other solution I see is to check when the parental >> relationship is being created, but this check results in a performance >> hit. > > There is no real point in checkin

Re: Limit looping in Grob::common_refpoint (issue 4079) (issue 134600043 by e...@ticalc.org)

On Sep 7, 2014, at 4:15 PM, e...@ticalc.org wrote: > On 2014/09/07 06:20:59, dak wrote: >> I don't like it. The maximum range of a variable is an arbitrary > value and this >> "loop avoidance" will not do us much good on a 64-bit architecture. > > Thanks for pointing that out. I will make the

Re: Bug in Lookup::bezier_sandwich

On Sep 1, 2014, at 11:16 AM, James wrote: > On 31/08/14 08:22, Mike Solomon wrote: >> On Aug 31, 2014, at 1:42 AM, Jürgen Reuter wrote: >> >>> Mike, >>> >>> appearently, the following patch works fine for my purposes (i.e. for flexa >>&

Re: Bug in Lookup::bezier_sandwich

On Aug 31, 2014, at 1:42 AM, Jürgen Reuter wrote: > Mike, > > appearently, the following patch works fine for my purposes (i.e. for flexa / > porrectus shapes): > > diff --git a/lily/lookup.cc b/lily/lookup.cc > index 344d42c..306d04e 100644 > --- a/lily/lookup.c

Re: get_property vs internal_get_property (was: issue 127860043)

On Aug 18, 2014, at 9:39 AM, Janek Warchoł wrote: > Hi, > > it's time to ask a n00b question and get the elephant (that was > bothering me for a couple years) out of the room: why do we have - and > use! - both get_property and internal_get_property? We ought to use > get_property everywhere,

Re: LilyPond meeting 2014?

___ > lilypond-devel mailing list > lilypond-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel I’d love to meet up but I am in gig mode as well towards the end of the summer and we have a

Re: Help needed to make LilyPond run better on Mediawiki

on how to automatically extract content in arbitrary units and to lay it out in arbitrary ways. LilyPond is pretty good at the second but not so great at the first. I’d be happy to irc about it next week if you’re around to discuss more the research project I

Scores in iBooks

te the score as you zoomed in, but still retain some musical sense with respect to stave groups and bar lines etc. just a thought Mike ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: how close are we to having an "addAt" or "insertAt" feature?

On Jan 14, 2014, at 1:03 AM, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Hello all, > > What would be involved in developing a feature to add notes or tweaks at an > arbitrary moment within a music expression? > > e.g. > >global = \repeat unfold 100 s1 >music = \addAt (4 3/8) \global \once \override R

Re: fixing German's Wikipedia entry of LilyPond

On Jan 13, 2014, at 11:04 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote: >>> My Windows machine won't convert this to SVG. Would someone else >>> like to and to upload the SVG? >> >> Hmm. I tried >> >> lilypond -dbackend=svg stockhausen.ly >> >> and get the error >> >> warning: cannot find SVG font #f > > B

Re: 3.0?

On Jan 9, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Urs Liska wrote: > Am 09.01.2014 12:03, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >>> Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? >> >> I could imagine that if LilyPond were made into an engraving library, >> and/or heavy rewiring to make it deeply in

Re: Building Lilypond documentation

On Jan 2, 2014, at 1:29 PM, Sven Axelsson wrote: > I've decided to get at least a little active in Lilypond development, and > thought I should start with getting my development environment up and > running. I get some weird errors when building the different doc targets, > such as: > > Plea

Re: Adds outside-staff-interface and outside-staff-axis-group-interface (issue 37950044)

On Dec 16, 2013, at 12:07 PM, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/12/16 09:58:40, mike7 wrote: >> On Dec 16, 2013, at 11:45 AM, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote: > >> > The summary seems incompatible with >> > http://music.stackexchange.com/a/14160/8773> >> > >> > Once an interface is required for outside-sta

Re: Adds outside-staff-interface and outside-staff-axis-group-interface (issue 37950044)

On Dec 16, 2013, at 11:56 AM, tdanielsmu...@googlemail.com wrote: > I applaud this! Properties in an interface which > were not honoured when processing certain grobs > which purported to implement that interface really > irritated me when trying to write documentation. > > Trevor > > > https

Re: Adds outside-staff-interface and outside-staff-axis-group-interface (issue 37950044)

On Dec 16, 2013, at 11:45 AM, d...@gnu.org wrote: > The summary seems incompatible with > http://music.stackexchange.com/a/14160/8773> > > Once an interface is required for outside-staffing a grob, the set of > grobs one can use in that manner is hardwired to the "intended" grobs. This is true.

Re: note-spacing: stretch somewhat uniformly; issue 3304 (issue 36830045)

On Dec 16, 2013, at 10:24 AM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote: > Reviewers: MikeSol, > > Message: > On 2013/12/16 07:42:52, MikeSol wrote: > >> If you understand this stuff, could you put a comment in > lily/include/spring.hh >> as to what inverse_compress_strength and inverse_stretch_strength are? >

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 15, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Werner LEMBERG wrote Sunday, December 15, 2013 9:07 AM >> >>> raw/final would be shorter than pure/unpure. >> >> I like that. At least for me this is easier to understand from a >> conceptual point of view. > > pencil/ink. All of thes

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 15, 2013, at 10:46 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> > >>> The layout engine could use get_property_data() freely, but before it >>> has set line-breaks the layout engine would refrain from calling any >>> callback func

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 15, 2013, at 12:58 AM, Keith OHara wrote: > On Sat, 14 Dec 2013 00:49:43 -0800, Mike Solomon wrote: > >> On Dec 14, 2013, at 9:35 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> Most of the contortions seem focused about when or when not and how to >>> pass begin

Re: grob-property: if callback is independent of layout, call just once (issue 42190043)

On Dec 14, 2013, at 12:00 PM, d...@gnu.org wrote: > > https://codereview.appspot.com/42190043/diff/1/lily/unpure-pure-container.cc > File lily/unpure-pure-container.cc (right): > > https://codereview.appspot.com/42190043/diff/1/lily/unpure-pure-container.cc#newcode45 > lily/unpure-pure-container

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 14, 2013, at 9:35 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > "Keith OHara" writes: > >> On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 23:05:49 -0800, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> That does not make sense. If you want call-once behavior, you can just >>> use a callback. >> >> At the moment, the decision on whether to preserve

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 14, 2013, at 9:21 AM, Keith OHara wrote: > On Fri, 13 Dec 2013 23:05:49 -0800, David Kastrup wrote: > >> That does not make sense. If you want call-once behavior, you can just >> use a callback. > > At the moment, the decision on whether to preserve the callback pointer in > the grob

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 13, 2013, at 9:07 AM, Keith OHara wrote: > On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 22:44:18 -0800, Keith OHara wrote: > >> After a brief look at the code, it looked like for each glyph being laid out >> there is one extra call of Open_type_font:: or Pango_font::name_to_index(), >> which is the function ca

gdb and hanging lilypond

Hey all, On my GCC-built-but-running-on-OSX lilypond, LilyPond has started to hang at the “Finding the ideal number of pages” stage. I have compiled LilyPond with debugging and without optimization, but when I gdb it and kill the process, no meaningful stack trace is given: My wild guess is th

Re: Website questions: GSoC

On Dec 12, 2013, at 3:06 PM, Urs Liska wrote: > The page "GSoC 2012" is obviously outdated. > > What should be done with it? > > Immediate reaction: "Put it on the attic". > But: Would it be useful to write a summary of what of it actually happened? > If yes: Is there something willing and abl

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 12, 2013, at 10:43 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Werner LEMBERG writes: > One extra lookup per glyph might be enough to explain the difference. We need to look up the glyph to get a skyline, but maybe could cache its index into the font in the stencil. >>> >>> That does not

Re: branching

On Dec 11, 2013, at 3:56 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Dec 11, 2013, at 11:36 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > > [...] > >> But that’s no good - we have to find a solution. Modularity, while >> perhaps a good long term solution,

Re: branching

On Dec 11, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Mike Solomon wrote Wednesday, December 11, 2013 10:22 AM > >> On Dec 11, 2013, at 11:36 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> As opposed to me, Graham excelled at organizing >>> and maintaining comm

Re: branching

On Dec 11, 2013, at 11:36 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > > > We are currently taking a look at how to create regions of LilyPond that > can be worked on independently and without affecting the overall quality > of LilyPond. If we manage to do this succ

Re: branching

On Dec 11, 2013, at 11:36 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> I had coffee with a developer a year or so ago who told me that he >> dropped out of the project because of commutation problems with David. >> Last night I wrote to him to share some of t

Re: centralization of lilypond development and forking (was: branching)

On Dec 11, 2013, at 9:18 AM, Graham Percival wrote: > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 08:39:58AM +0200, Mike Solomon wrote: >> See: >> >> http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Allows-minimum-length-to-work-for-end-of-line-spanners-issue-7453046-td141952.html#a142870 >>

Re: branching

On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:03 AM, David Nalesnik wrote: > > Hi, > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Carl Peterson > wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Mike Solomon wrote: > > The only hassle for me, which I did not run up against when I started with > the

Re: branching

On Dec 10, 2013, at 9:32 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: > > > On 12/10/13 5:42 AM, "Mike Solomon" wrote: > >> Hey all, >> >> As 2.18 draws near, I¹d like to work with everyone to establish a system >> of branching for LilyPond development. After sev

Re: branching

On Dec 10, 2013, at 4:23 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> Hey all, >> >> As 2.18 draws near, I’d like to work with everyone to establish a >> system of branching for LilyPond development. After several rounds of >> discussing things wi

Re: branching

On Dec 10, 2013, at 2:58 PM, Graham Percival wrote: > On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 02:42:45PM +0200, Mike Solomon wrote: >> On the website, we would offer _all_ of these development >> branches, including the one built off of staging, as GUB builds. > > A few years ago, we

branching

Hey all, As 2.18 draws near, I’d like to work with everyone to establish a system of branching for LilyPond development. After several rounds of discussing things with David K, this emerged as the best way to avoid arguments about integrating work into the development branch that have led seve

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 10, 2013, at 12:18 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Dec 10, 2013, at 11:47 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> Nope. In this case, the answer is to cache frequently accessed >>> information instead of requesting it again and a

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 10, 2013, at 11:47 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Dec 10, 2013, at 11:27 AM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> Mike Solomon writes: >>> >>>> On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Keith OHara wrote: >>>>>

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 10, 2013, at 11:27 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Keith OHara wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:10:08 -0800, David Kastrup wrote: >>> >>>> "Keith OHara" writes: &g

Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ?

On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Keith OHara wrote: > On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:10:08 -0800, David Kastrup wrote: > >> "Keith OHara" writes: >> >>> I timed one big score, Movement 1 of >>> >>> 2.16.2 2.17.95 >>> WinXP 2m 30s

Re: Some audicious hand-engraved slurs compared to LilyPond

On Dec 3, 2013, at 4:51 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Dec 3, 2013, at 4:19 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> David Nalesnik writes: >>> >>> >>> So I wanted to share the slurs, and then LilyPond surprised me w

Re: Some audicious hand-engraved slurs compared to LilyPond

On Dec 3, 2013, at 4:19 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > David Nalesnik writes: > > > So I wanted to share the slurs, and then LilyPond surprised me with > awful tuplet numbers. I’m guessing that there are a few things stopping the number from lining up nicely, but the most glaring one is line 526

Communication style on the devel list

On Nov 30, 2013, at 10:58 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote: > 2013/11/30 Mike Solomon : >> I would argue that the point that Janek brings up above is not a healthy >> sign for LilyPond development. >> Several developers, including myself, have lowered their participation >>

Re: v_size in lexer.cc

On Nov 13, 2013, at 12:11 AM, Keith OHara wrote: > Mike Solomon mikesolomon.org> writes: > >> out/lexer.cc:32:25: error: prototype for >> 'size_t yyFlexLexer::LexerInput(char*, size_t)' >> does not match any in class 'yyFlexLexer' >

v_size in lexer.cc

Hey all, Compiling LilyPond with g++ on mac os x, I get the following errors: out/lexer.cc: At global scope: out/lexer.cc:32:25: error: prototype for 'size_t yyFlexLexer::LexerInput(char*, size_t)' does not match any in class 'yyFlexLexer' #define yyFlexLexer yyFlexLexer

Re: Continuing towards 2.18

On Nov 5, 2013, at 9:23 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > So I'm > more comfortable reverting it as well. > Go for it, but could someone please remind me to push it to 2.19 if I forget? Cheers, MS ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org h

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:20 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:50 PM, David Kastrup wrote: >> >>> Shrug. At any rate, it would be important to get some feedback >>> regarding installation of the stock LilyPond binar

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:03 PM, Mike Solomon wrote: > > On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling > wrote: > >> On 03/11/13 13:36, Mike Solomon wrote: >>> Doesn’t work, but all the files in flower compile fine with gcc, so I’m a >>> happy camper.

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 13:36, Mike Solomon wrote: >> Doesn’t work, but all the files in flower compile fine with gcc, so I’m a >> happy camper. >> Apple’s home cooked clang is not free software, so there’s no reason to &g

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:50 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> Apple’s home cooked clang is not free software, so there’s no reason >> to expect free software to compile with it. > > Non sequitur. There is nothing wrong with trying to bring some more >

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 1:15 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 12:33, Mike Solomon wrote: >> >> [ ... snip ... ] >> >> …these fonts are always a pain, but I usually figure out some way to cheat >> and get them in there. But that shouldn’t have any

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:45 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 11:18, Mike Solomon wrote: >> Yeah, the output is fine (clean bill of health, all systems go). I had to >> specifically set CPPFLAGS to deal w/ some homebrew issues, but otherwise >> nothin

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 11:15 AM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 03/11/13 11:00, Mike Solomon wrote: >> That’s fine, I’ll download gcc. > > From what I understand from friends who've experienced the same, you'll have > to manually remove/rewrite some of the

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:37 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > >> On 03/11/13 10:09, Mike Solomon wrote: >>> Looks like some files in flower don't play nice with the most recent >>> version of the standard library bundled with Xcode… &g

Re: compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

ter at identifying ambiguities and > potential errors and providing instructions for how to fix them. > > Mike, can you try typing on a terminal prompt both: > > g++ --version > clang++ —version So g++ simlinks to clang, and it is a special apple-brewed clang based on 3.

Re: mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

On Nov 2, 2013, at 1:46 PM, Mike Solomon wrote: > > On Nov 2, 2013, at 1:17 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > >> Mike Solomon writes: >> >>> > > > So this definitely gives a directory with libguile.h in it. But for some > reason it’s not found by t

compilation errors from Xcode's new standard library

Looks like some files in flower don't play nice with the most recent version of the standard library bundled with Xcode… clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-mno-fused-madd' clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-L/usr/local/lib' In file included from /Users/mikes

Re: mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

On Nov 3, 2013, at 9:37 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> mbp-de-mike:build mikesolomon$ ls /usr/local/Cellar/guile18/1.8.8/include >> guilelibguilelibguile.h >> >> I’m stumped. It is obvious that CPPFLAGS is p

Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 3631 in lilypond: 2.17 does a worse job with vertical spacing and/or the page layout than 2.16

On Nov 2, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote: > On 02/11/13 15:12, Mike Solomon wrote: >> Not sure what a git formatted patch is…I can, however, download the Rietveld >> patch and send it to you if you want. > > Git can extract text patch files from your v

Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 3631 in lilypond: 2.17 does a worse job with vertical spacing and/or the page layout than 2.16

On Nov 2, 2013, at 3:03 PM, lilyp...@googlecode.com wrote: > > Comment #45 on issue 3631 by d...@gnu.org: 2.17 does a worse job with > vertical spacing and/or the page layout than 2.16 > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3631 > > Can do. Can you send a git-format-patch by mail

Re: mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

On Nov 2, 2013, at 1:17 PM, David Kastrup wrote: > Mike Solomon writes: > >> Hey all, >> >> In my update to OS X 10.9, I’ve had to uninstall and reinstall lots of >> stuff. In the LilyPond configure script, I get >> >> >> checking for guile

mac os x 10.9 and libguile.h

Hey all, In my update to OS X 10.9, I’ve had to uninstall and reinstall lots of stuff. In the LilyPond configure script, I get checking for guile-config... guile-config checking guile-config version... 1.8.8 checking guile compile flags... -I/usr/local/Cellar/guile18/1.8.8/include -D_THREAD_

Re: Looks for prebroken pieces of dead items in the pure relevant function. (issue 18090043)

On Nov 1, 2013, at 8:31 AM, lemzw...@googlemail.com wrote: > > https://codereview.appspot.com/18090043/diff/60001/lily/axis-group-interface.cc > File lily/axis-group-interface.cc (right): > > https://codereview.appspot.com/18090043/diff/60001/lily/axis-group-interface.cc#newcode507 > lily/axis-

Re: Looks for prebroken pieces of dead items in the pure relevant function. (issue 18090043)

On Nov 1, 2013, at 7:49 AM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote: > On 2013/10/30 08:09:53, mike7 wrote: >> On Oct 30, 2013, at 8:32 AM, mailto:k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote: > >> > I do not understand the Todo: comment; nothing should have been > suicided >> > at this stage. > >> The original clef is suicide

Re: Looks for prebroken pieces of dead items in the pure relevant function. (issue 18090043)

On Oct 30, 2013, at 8:32 AM, k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote: > I do not understand the Todo: comment; nothing should have been suicided > at this stage. What is the life cycle of a Clef and the copies made for > line-breaking possibilities? The original clef is suicided in the handle_prebroken_depend

Re: Remove DynamicText from script-interface (issue 14424044)

Make sure to acknowledge dynamic text in slur-proto-engraver.cc and tuplet-engraver.cc. https://codereview.appspot.com/14424044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Checks to see if tuplet brackets have bounds (issue 13582046)

s one already exists. At least that, I >> believe, was the general approach adopted in the past and it seems >> sound to me. > > Well, being defensive is always a good idea. It's just that when we get > to _know_ the defenses to be triggered without us expecting it, we

Re: Checks to see if tuplet brackets have bounds (issue 13582046)

On 13 sept. 2013, at 08:41, d...@gnu.org wrote: > > https://codereview.appspot.com/13582046/diff/1/lily/tuplet-bracket.cc > File lily/tuplet-bracket.cc (right): > > https://codereview.appspot.com/13582046/diff/1/lily/tuplet-bracket.cc#newcode99 > lily/tuplet-bracket.cc:99: if (!left || !right)

Re: stencil-integral: use box extents specified in markup; issue 3255 (issue 9295044)

On 30 août 2013, at 11:39, d...@gnu.org wrote: > >> > I suggest that we refrain from embracing your somewhat optimistic >> > estimates until after wrapping up a stable release. > >> I don't see the relationship between the two. > > Which makes it a good thing that you are not pursuing a career

Re: stencil-integral: use box extents specified in markup; issue 3255 (issue 9295044)

On 30 août 2013, at 10:11, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/08/30 07:41:49, mike7 wrote: > >> I'd still argue that (2) is the best way to go as it is a > one-stop-shopping way >> to clear all these bugs (and perhaps more) as they arise. > > Since we are currently in the process of recovering from t

Re: stencil-integral: use box extents specified in markup; issue 3255 (issue 9295044)

On 30 août 2013, at 07:49, "Keith OHara" wrote: > On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 21:24:25 -0700, wrote: > >> Conceptually, I prefer (1), but this is based on your descriptions and >> the previous discussion, not on understanding the code... >> > > Then look at (2) and see if you think that would be goo

Re: Allows inner-markup spacing using skylines. (issue 13341044)

ever cached, but as it > is not >> default beahvior anywhere in the code base, it allows people to decide > on the >> efficiency versus snugness-of-placement trade-off. For people > creating complex >> markups, this is useful. > > Mike, the question is not whether

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 28 août 2013, at 09:47, "Keith OHara" wrote: > On Tue, 27 Aug 2013 23:30:32 -0700, Mike Solomon wrote: > >> On 28 août 2013, at 05:28, "Keith OHara" wrote: >> >>> Of course I think it would be better to allow box dimensions in the stenc

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 28 août 2013, at 05:28, "Keith OHara" wrote: > On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:57:58 -0700, Mike Solomon wrote: > >> On 27 août 2013, at 09:01, "Keith OHara" wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 22:37:17 -0700, Mike Solomon >>> wrote: >>

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 27 août 2013, at 11:09, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/08/27 06:58:05, mike7 wrote: >> On 27 août 2013, at 09:01, "Keith OHara" > wrote: > >> > How are skylines asked-for, and is it possible to know if they were > asked for >> while interpreting the markup ? >> > {

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 27 août 2013, at 09:01, "Keith OHara" wrote: > On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 22:37:17 -0700, Mike Solomon wrote: > >> On 27 août 2013, at 07:18, "Keith OHara" wrote: >> >>> (1) At the moment, the stencil expressions are assembled first, when markup

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 27 août 2013, at 07:18, "Keith OHara" wrote: > On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 02:11:28 -0700, Mike Solomon wrote: > >> >> I think that if we can devise a better system, the creation of a new stencil >> primitive is unnecessary. If we agree that we should impleme

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 26 août 2013, at 13:31, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/08/26 10:18:04, mike7 wrote: > >> I think Harm is right that, irrespective of documentation, users use > what's >> available. > > If people meddle with internals instead of using provided API functions, > they deserve whatever they get. >

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 26 août 2013, at 13:13, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/08/26 10:05:25, mike7 wrote: >> On 26 août 2013, at 13:00, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote: > >> > That's bullshit since nobody assembles stencil expressions manually. > >> I assemble stencil expressions manually. > > If you meddle with interna

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 26 août 2013, at 13:00, d...@gnu.org wrote: > That's bullshit since nobody assembles stencil expressions manually. I assemble stencil expressions manually. > This is done using opaque functions like ly:stencil-translate. ly:make-stencil is all over the place in the code and is a public func

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 26 août 2013, at 12:39, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > >> To summarize: stencil expressions (expr_) currently do not contain >> information for how to place stencils with respect to others. They >> contain information passed to the backends on how to lay out >> stencils. If we adopt either Keith'

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 26 août 2013, at 11:41, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/08/26 06:42:38, mike7 wrote: >> On 26 août 2013, at 08:35, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote: > >> > So why do you talk about that in the first place? > >> Because I'd rather spend more time implementing a solid system than > less time >> impleme

Re: Adds dimension stencil command to correct with-dimension (issue 12957047)

On 26 août 2013, at 08:35, d...@gnu.org wrote: > On 2013/08/26 05:25:42, mike7 wrote: >> On 26 août 2013, at 08:20, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote: > >> > Indeed. Instead of calling stencil-integrate on a "surrogate > stencil" >> > or whatever for deriving a skyline, the respective stencil operation

  1   2   3   4   >