Thanks, applied.
http://codereview.appspot.com/2083043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/2083043/diff/1/2
File lily/ly-module.cc (right):
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/2083043/diff/1/2#newcode36
lily/ly-module.cc:36: SCM maker =
ly_lily_module_constant("make-module");
On 2010/09/02 00:24:02, Neil Puttock wrote:
ly_lily_module_constant ("make-mo
LGTM.
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/2083043/diff/1/2
File lily/ly-module.cc (right):
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/2083043/diff/1/2#newcode36
lily/ly-module.cc:36: SCM maker =
ly_lily_module_constant("make-module");
ly_lily_module_constant ("make-module");
http://www.codereview.appspot
Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com, Neil Puttock, hanwenn, Patrick
McCarty,
Message:
New issue as I can't edit 116044 on Rietveld any more.
Cheers,
Ian
Description:
Successor to issue 116044.
Removed handler and stray dots in lily.scm.
Removed lily-lexer.cc and define-grob-proerties.scm from
JOS5VEFMCzRrwkisfS
fFrpmguluydqZ6FDjc4q/Ia1h0GGiH0CHWSMRow2WhVILMQtBKBnQBhRkYfU265X
ZwTNINt4/alFnjhnO9oJv9qnbQbLWL15g6hwzRvOLBbrOVONeVMl3TQF/tbt00Po
DPngHhizsqguA7YkG8fgNaylo/5MbHphG+yLzkkkzm97I8DSlpvKhkfuGbSZU7p3
ILzp/yQjEZ7gqyuZY6uSyc8sbwSQN0HHq7zrBEchUI3fa8y51MvTvudKWy27c3U=
=cnFp
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
>From 07
Have new patch-set ready,
Message describing this patch set: Can handler and stray dots from
lily.scm, remove lily-lexer & define-grob-properties from patch,
but git-cl doesn't think I own this issue any more :-(.
Closing this issue and opening a new one with correct tracker reference.
Cheers,
I
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Ian Hulin wrote:
> (define (make-music-type-predicate . music-types)
> (define ((make-music-type-predicate-aux mtypes) expr)
> (if (null? mtypes)
> #f
> (or (eqv? (car mtypes) (ly:music-property expr 'name))
> ((make-music-type-predicat
On 2010/08/28 19:16:18, Ian Hulin wrote:
Patrick and Neil, do I have to fix all the compatibility
problems in all the scm files loaded by lily.scm in order
to push what we have so far?
No. Some of the other compatibility problems are quite complicated and
deserve their own separate issues.
P
On 2010/08/28 19:16:18, Ian Hulin wrote:
Anyhow, building against V1.9.11 showed up Neil's concerns with the
code
in lily.scm/simple-format-handler and /ergonomic-simple-format and I
have a fix for this. It looks like the byte-compiler in Guile V1.9.11
is stricter than the interpreter in V1.8
e so far?
I now seem to be finding compatibility problems not directly related to
replacing %module-public-interface, and I'd rather tackle these as
smaller, more discrete items of work.
Cheers,
Ian Hulin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Even though this is title T1055: this change is now being tracked as
Issue 1224.
Ian Hulin
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52005
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52005#newcode215
scm/lily.scm:215: (apply fancy-format (cons dest . rest
On 2010/08/09 18:35:54, Patrick McCarty wrote:
`cons' only works with two concr
format) unless it's rebound locally (as I did above for testing).
The only case where it was already using ergonomic-simple-format arose
from the removal of module-public-interface (which you've restored in
the latest patch.)
To reiterate: with your patch applied, if I redefine format to u
is patch 'off-topic'.
It was an answer from Han-Wen about how we'd got into using
%module-public-interface in the first place:
"I think %public-interface hack is to force all of the definitions
including
future ones to be public; the code that executes the assignmen
-modules (scm clip-region))
in a .ly file, then it doesn't make sense to defer the change.
It was an answer from Han-Wen about how we'd got into using
%module-public-interface in the first place:
"I think %public-interface hack is to force all of the definitions
including
rote:
Can you give an example justifying this addition?
I can't think of any identifier set in a .ly file which would need
this.
It was an answer from Han-Wen about how we'd got into using
%module-public-interface in the first place:
"I think %public-interface hack is to force all o
On 2010/08/09 19:15:44, Patrick McCarty wrote:
I don't know. But I did file a bug report regarding this issue:
http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?30623
Heh, that's why I asked, since nobody's replied yet. :)
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/show
_
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52003
File lily/ly-module.cc (right):
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52003#newcode46
lily/ly-module.cc:46: Guile V1.9/2.0
On 2010/08/09 19:08:58, Neil Puttock wrote:
Is it?
I don't know. But I did file a bug report re
Hi Ian,
Can you remove the tab->space changes you've made (particularly in
lily.scm)? Some of them don't improve the indentation.
Cheers,
Neil
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52001
File input/regression/clip-systems.ly (right):
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/d
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52005
File scm/lily.scm (right):
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/diff/51001/52005#newcode215
scm/lily.scm:215: (apply fancy-format (cons dest . rest
`cons' only works with two concrete arguments, like
(cons dest rest)
http://
Hi all,
An Updated patch set is available for review.
It's undergone a regression test run here.
Sorry for the whitespace noise - git-cl upload doesn't have a -b option
like git format-patch.
Cheers,
Ian
http://www.codereview.appspot.com/1160044/show
_
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Ian Hulin wrote:
> On 01/08/10 22:37, Patrick McCarty wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Neil Puttock wrote:
>>> On 1 August 2010 21:49, Patrick McCarty wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think I found the problem.
>>>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi all,
On 01/08/10 22:37, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Neil Puttock wrote:
>> On 1 August 2010 21:49, Patrick McCarty wrote:
>>
>>> I think I found the problem.
>>>
>>> With Gu
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Neil Puttock wrote:
> On 1 August 2010 21:49, Patrick McCarty wrote:
>
>> I think I found the problem.
>>
>> With Guile 1.9, `module-public-interface' doesn't return an interface
>> for `the-scm-module', which we rely o
On 1 August 2010 21:49, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> I think I found the problem.
>
> With Guile 1.9, `module-public-interface' doesn't return an interface
> for `the-scm-module', which we rely on:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (module-public-interface the-scm-modu
t;> In the case of `profile-property-access.ly', the format call
>> ends up using `ergonomic-simple-format' from lily.scm.
>
> Thanks for this observation, Neil.
>
> The reason why I suggested this change is to prevent a compile failure
> with Guile 1.9. The backtrac
le-format' from lily.scm.
Thanks for this observation, Neil.
The reason why I suggested this change is to prevent a compile failure
with Guile 1.9. The backtrace is below. Perhaps there is a bug in the
`module-public-interface' procedure? Not really sure how to test if
this is the ca
/lily-f8232be1
Processing 52/lily-23a75a14
error: Children (2 0) exited with errors.
The log file for the failed snippet is here:
out/lybook-testdb/a1/lily-624a475e.log
Unless I misunderstood Han-Wen,that's why we were jerking around with
%module-public-interface in the first place.
Sure, b
scm_list_3 (ly_symbol2scm ("module-use!"), mod, used);
This effectively exports all bindings, so all local defines are now
exported.
Unless I misunderstood Han-Wen,that's why we were jerking around with
%module-public-interface in the first place.
In the case of `profile-property
On 2010/07/29 00:55:35, Patrick McCarty wrote:
With your patchset, I am getting a compile failure with the regression
test
`profile-property-access.ly':
Same here.
+ = scm_list_3 (ly_symbol2scm ("module-use!"), mod, used);
This effectively exports all bindings, so all local defines are now
On 2010/07/29 00:28:24, Patrick McCarty wrote:
On 2010/07/28 22:49:11, Ian Hulin wrote:
> On 19/05/10 23:42, mailto:n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > I've tried testing your latest patch, but it fails on
clip-systems.ly.
> >
> > `make-rhythmic-location' (defined in clip-region.scm) appears to
Hi Ian,
On 2010/07/28 22:49:11, Ian Hulin wrote:
On 19/05/10 23:42, mailto:n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I've tried testing your latest patch, but it fails on
clip-systems.ly.
>
> `make-rhythmic-location' (defined in clip-region.scm) appears to be
> inaccessible from a \layout block.
A new
On Sat 15 May 2010 22:32, Ian Hulin writes:
> Please can you confirm that module-export-all! will be supplied in Guile
> V2.0.
Yep, it's in git.
Cheers,
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://list
dy Wingo (Guile Developer)"
Conversation: [frogs] Patch: Replace use of guile %module-public-interface
in Lilypond (Rietveld issue 1160044)
Subject: [frogs] Patch: Replace use of guile %module-public-interface in
Lilypond (Rietveld issue 1160044)
I've incorporated the suggestion from guile develo
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Ian Hulin wrote:
>
> I believe you originally put together the Lily/Guile module code. There's an
> upcoming change such that Guile want to deprecate
yep.
>
> %module-public-interface . The Guile developers have come up with the
> pr
Hi,
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Ian Hulin wrote:
[...]
>> I'm not the ReleaseMeister for Lilypond; you'll get a better picture by
>> talking to Graham Percival (gra...@percival-music.ca).
>>
>> But FWIW it looks like we're on our few last development releases be
le version after V2.14, but again, mileage may vary if
> you talk to more experienced Lilypond people.
Is Guile 2.0 already released?
I think it makes sense to forget about guile 2.0 for the 2.14 release,
and require 2.0 for the 2.16 release. We could scrap lots of hairy GC
code if we could mov
e.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=%25module-public-interface&sbtn=Search
>>> http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=%25module-public-interface+lang%3Ac%2B%2B&sbtn=Search
>>
>> Lilypond does:
>>
>> --8<---cut here---
On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 11:50:08AM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> On 2010-04-02, Ian Hulin wrote:
> >
> > Graham, Vincent, is it worth opening a tracker to capture
ITYM Valentin.
> > forward-compatibility issues with Guile?
>
> We already have one (sort of):
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond
adapt to these stricter
guidelines, or Guile will loosen its policy with respect to (if ...)
statements.
> 4. We've already seen the %module-public-interface thing in the Lily
> C++. There's probably more smelly stuff lurking in the C++
> interface, which won't surface un
t any
problem. But it seems that the %module-public-interface is used
explicitly, at least by texmacs and lilypond.
How do they use it?
Linking to the evil empire:
http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&lr=&q=%25module-public-interface&sbtn=Search
http://www.goog
Hi Ludovic,
On 30/03/10 22:52, Ludovic � wrote:
Hello,
Andy Wingo writes:
On Tue 30 Mar 2010 22:56, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
I'm pretty sure that the submodule thing can be changed without any
problem. But it seems that the %module-public-interface is used
explicitl
42 matches
Mail list logo
